Unprotected Older Persons: The Aged Housing Question

UN approaches to housing inaccessibility and inequality for elderly persons, and the limitations that exist in implementation

Anna Richards

Introduction

For the typical middle-class pensioner in a Western context, international law lends very little assistance in pathways to adequate housing. This older person cannot rely on state benefits to provide financial assistance, nor can they rely on welfare to help them out of a suboptimal housing situation. Therefore, hidden homelessness can emerge through their inability to obtain adequate housing for their needs.

This blog intends to address the extent to which international (United Nations) law already exists regarding housing inequality and inaccessibility for older and middle-class persons, who are not afforded the flexibility of employment or the ability to rely on social benefits. This blog will focus on challenges related to income stagnation and pensions, intersectional age discrimination, and housing inadequacy for people with disabilities. These difficulties are covered because of their particular significance in the research literature regarding the right to housing for older persons.

To limit the scope of this research, I will not focus on relatively wealthy elderly persons, who have the capacity to facilitate their own housing improvements. To look further into this topic, one may refer to Walker’s work (Walker, 2008). Similarly, I will also not focus on especially poor elderly persons, who may live on the street and rely primarily on welfare frameworks and social housing policy. To examine the impact of welfare assistance on elderly populations, one might refer to other studies (Kim et al., 2023).

It is imperative to highlight that difficulties related to the right to housing affect the entire specified demographic, and these inequalities must be viewed through an intersectional lens, with some groups disproportionately affected by this legislation (Gutterman, 2023). Physical inaccessibility can render staircases in dwellings unsuitable for people with disabilities or limited mobility (Hill et al., 2000). Welfare inequality and the concept of ‘wealthfare’ can leave many individuals unsupported, as they lack sufficient pension funds to maintain higher levels of housing adequacy (Ronald & Dewilde, 2017). Sex, race and physical disability are all additional impacting factors on this, with women, people of colour, and the disabled being primarily affected (Williams & Robinson, 2024).

This blog will utilise international human rights instruments such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (UN, 1967) and the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (MIPAA) (UNECE, 2002) to analyse the levels of acknowledgement for older persons and the levels at which they are supported and protected within these frameworks. This blog will therefore focus primarily on what UN legislation already exists and where gaps exist within its contents. While these human rights instruments provide limited protections for these situations, working-class pensioners, especially those with intersectional problems, are largely an overlooked and unprotected group and are particularly vulnerable to hidden homelessness and inequality.

Housing issues of middle-class older people

There are a multitude of common problems faced by working-class, older people in the reality of housing in 2026. To begin any analysis of the state of middle-class elderly housing, one must first look to the research literature on these areas. In this research, three areas were consistently highlighted as particular concerns and will be explored further in this section. The first section regarding income stagnation and pensions addresses the emergence of wealthfare and illiquid funds of older populations. The next covers age-related discrimination based on sex, race and lifestyle, with certain populations being overrepresented within housing inequality data. Finally, the implications of housing inequalities on elderly populations who are also disabled will be covered within this section, as these populations are especially affected by housing inequalities, and even more so in the likelihood of intersectional discrimination.

Income stagnation and pensions

The first issue relates to income stagnation and pensions.

In an ever-increasing housing market, older populations without a regular income are left with limited options due to a lack of housing on additional property. With the concept of wealthfare coming up time after time in literature across continents and political systems, the favour of large landowners, and theories of housing systems based on wealthfare financing for aged populations, rather than pensions, are the norm. However, with trends indicating an increase from 4% to 13.2% among elderly people in private rentals and a decrease in homeownership in the UK (Williams & Robinson, 2024), the gap between those who can and cannot afford accessible housing is widening.

This trend is also observed in other countries, with the risk of income poverty in Germany rising from 10% in 2000 to 18% in 2019 (Alcántara, 2021), demonstrating that this phenomenon is not isolated. This demographic of pensioners is fundamentally stuck in a system that has not been organised with them in mind, without the flexibility of job mobility or the support of social housing systems. The cost of maintaining old dwellings and inflation on bills further disadvantages this group (Delfani et al., 2015).

Additionally, wealth stored in dwellings is illiquid. While one could accumulate wealth in assets, they have no capacity to improve their living situation without giving up their place of residence, which may not be an option in many housing markets internationally (Delfani et al., 2015). Lastly, there will inevitably be a section of the general population excluded from homeownership due to other sociocultural factors. This group is therefore left with very few options and is excluded from wealthfare schemes of financing coming from property investment (Colic-Peisker et al, 2015). Because this subsection is neither extremely poor nor extremely wealthy, those affected are left in a static position that is largely overlooked in international policy.

Discrimination based on sex, race and lifestyle within older populations

In addition to pension inequality, discrimination based on age intersectionality with sex, race and lifestyle is consistently represented within data relating to inaccessibility to housing for elderly populations. ‘Ageism’ is a phenomenon where one is discriminated against based on age, particularly affecting older renters, according to one Canadian study (Spencer, 2009). However, this is not an independent phenomenon and works in intersectionality with other areas such as sex or race, particularly affecting those with disabilities or people of colour (Spencer, 2009). In a study conducted by Williams and Robinson at the University of Sheffield, the forecast of relative poverty is higher among older women, with an estimated 54% experiencing relative poverty compared to 45% of their male counterparts (Williams & Robinson, 2024). Additionally, in the same study, characteristics identified to be associated with renting included: ‘being a carer, a previous history of renting, lower capacity to regularly save money, having a disability or long-term health condition, and belonging to a minority ethnic group’ (Williams & Robinson, 2024). This can be especially precarious for older tenants due to tenure insecurity, inflation, and a lack of asset accumulation (Williams & Robinson, 2024). Due to these housing and class divisions, based on ‘people’s economic means, their social capital, their cultural resources, and their personal capital’ defined by Vrooman and others (Vrooman et al, 2024), minority groups are shown to be disproportionately marginalised within conversations regarding accesses to home-ownership, especially when considering intersectionality of these traits, especially mentioning women of colour (Crenshaw, 1991) and disabled women (Maroto et al, 2019) (Lewis et al, 2020). Due to these barriers to entry within home ownership in general, (Hess et al, 2025) access to home-ownership later in life is less likely for minority groups, ethnic populations and women, (Dawkins, 2005) as without access to compounding intergenerational wealth transfer or down payment assistance, there is little policy writing in place to financially or otherwise support this transition to home-ownership (U.S. Department of the Treasury, 2022). It is important to note that it is not these obstacles in isolation, but rather the accumulation of disadvantages over a lifetime, that can lead to inaccessibility of homeownership and adequate housing in later life. The lack of intervention within disadvantaged circles, such as those mentioned within the ‘Projections of housing tenure and poverty’ referenced prior, allow many to colloquially ‘slip through the gaps’ of the housing system at earlier stages of life, and are left in later years without equity and a buffer system to rely upon should modifications need be made (Bentley, 2025) (Stephens, Leishman, 2017).

Older people in need of modifications to their homes

A subcategory of disadvantaged elderly, particularly affected by concerns of housing instability, is the disabled due to inadequate housing for ever-changing physical needs.

The financial burden of home modifications, such as stair lifts for inaccessible staircases in dwellings, falls primarily on those in need of them because their income is slightly too high for government welfare schemes.

While grants such as the Disabled Facilities Grant (Scope, 2026) in the UK and the WMO Social Support Act (WMO, 2015) in the Netherlands are in place to support disabled persons financially to support independent living, these systems operate on a means tested basis, that the average pensioner tends to be excluded from either partially or fully, due to having an income above the means tested barrier. An ethical dilemma is raised here also as to whether aged populations with physical limitations who need home modification can be understood to be ‘disabled’ in these contexts.

While pensioners who have a manifest disability due to ageing are already at a disadvantage within their own housing situations, their mobility is also limited, with the available housing options being largely inadequate for their needs. The US Census Bureau, for example, estimates only 1 in 10 American dwellings is ‘ageing ready’ with a step-free entryway, a bedroom and a full bathroom on the first floor and ‘at least one bathroom accessibility feature’ (Vespa et al., 2020). Additionally, the US Census Bureau estimated that over 8 million households were reported as inadequate for the needs of an older adult living within the dwelling (Vespa et al., 2020). These limitations have exorbitant effects on the mental and physical health of elderly people, and that is excluding the intersectional conversations to be had within social isolation (Cudjoe et al, 2020) and physical isolation (Melik et al, 2026) that also play a huge role in the outcomes of elderly people, especially those with disabilities.

Recognition of the Middle Class, the Aged, and Housing Inaccessibility in International Human Rights Law Instruments

International (UN) law recognises many areas of housing rights. The housing rights of older people, however, remain largely overlooked within policy. Documents such as General Comments of the UN Committee for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (MIPAA) seem to prioritise housing rights of older persons. The soft-law nature of many of these documents, however, as well as the lack of an individual charter of rights for older people, has created a significant lack of protection for individuals who are above the threshold for social welfare allocations and cannot afford to improve their housing privately. In 2010, the older person-specific UNHCR General Assembly working group was created to strengthen the protection of the rights of Older People and to review the implementation of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing (2010). This blog will first look at the main UN legislation on the right to housing of older persons, the MIPAA, and later examine other soft-binding legislation related to the topic.

One finding from the research for this blog is the lack of a common term for the elderly within the UN and other legislation. Within the MIPAA, the term “aged persons” is used to describe this group; however, the CESCR General Comment No. 6 prefers the term “older persons”. The lack of definition in this area is notable, as it indicates that this group has not been clearly defined in the literature, making it difficult to create legislation directly applicable to this subgroup. Due to a lack of clear terminology, the terms “aged persons” and “older people” have been used interchangeably in this blog to describe this group.

Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing

UN instruments in recent decades have contributed to heightened awareness of the issues faced by older people in the housing sector. However, they are non-binding and have been implemented only to a limited extent. The MIPAA (UNECE, 2002), adopted in April 2002, is a comprehensive document comprising 239 recommendations (Formosa, Kapur Shankardass, 2023) to achieve 35 objectives aimed at fostering “a society for all ages” (UN, 1998). The document incorporates a ‘development approach’ in which older persons are included in ‘national and international development plans’ and an ‘intergenerational life-course approach’ primarily targeting ‘equity and inclusiveness’ throughout all stages of life intersectionality, with an explicit mention of focused ‘attention on the causes of vulnerability and social exclusion’(Zelenev, 2008).

The four main approaches to ageing cited in MIPAA are economic development, sustainable development, human development, and poverty reduction. While these areas are crucial to development for older people, they overlook a large demographic of middle-class pensioners who need additional legislative support to ensure housing availability (Zelenev, 2008). It is foremost important to mention that under section C, issue 1, titled housing and the living environment, the MIPAA is shown to be a progressive document in its acknowledgement of specific housing issues faced by older-aged individuals. This is shown, for example, in objective 2(d), which addresses assistance for older persons in making their homes “free of barriers to mobility and access” (UNECE, 2002). Additionally, action (i) of objective 1 in the same section specifies the focus of ensuring that housing “takes appropriate account of their care and cultural needs” (UNECE, 2002). These actions demonstrate that the UN is aware of the problems faced by this group and of the need for specific legislation regarding accessible housing for elderly people. Recognition within the International Year of Older Persons of 1999 (UNGA, 1992) and the creation of the MIPAA (UNGA Third Committee, 1996) are steps towards further legislation within the UN in these areas.

CESCR documents

Soft law, such as the MIPAA (UN, 2002) and the CESCR General Comments 4 (CESCR, 1991) and 6 (CESCR, 1995), provides further UN acknowledgement of the difficulties related to the right to housing for aged populations. However, these documents provide very little protection for those whom they intend to assist. The CESCR is responsible for ensuring compliance with the ICESCR.

CESCR General Comment No. 4 focuses on Article 11 (1) of the ICESCR, which codifies the right to adequate housing. This Comment addresses this right broadly, without a direct focus on aged persons. However, this group is specified in section e, Accessibility, which states that ‘such disadvantaged groups as the elderly, children, the physically disabled, the terminally ill, HIV-positive individuals, persons with persistent medical problems, the mentally ill… and other groups should be ensured some degree of priority consideration in the housing sphere.’ (CESCR, 1991) Due to the broad scope of the groups covered in Article 11, ranging from those with medical issues to age groups, the elderly are not treated as a distinct category in CESCR General Comment No. 4.

This is elaborated on in CESCR General Comment No. 6, which adds another dimension to how the right to housing for older persons is understood in human rights instruments. For instance, Article 11 of the fourth general comment focuses on the right to an adequate standard of living. (UNHCR)which, under the instruction of the Vienna International Plan of Action on Ageing, should be viewed as more than just mere shelter, and the ‘psychological and social significance’ of the house of an older person must be legally recognised with importance too. (UNHCR) The psychological implications of inadequate dwellings in the conversation on the right to housing are also widely represented in research literature on the topic. (Tipple, Speak, 2003)

While these CESCR documents alongside the MIPAA recognise the importance of housing to elderly populations, the non-binding ‘soft’ nature of this legislation means the implementation of these comments and recommendations is not consistent (Sidorenko, 2022), nor has ageing been promoted as a ‘developmental priority’ 20 years on (UN. Population Division, 2013).

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

An interesting thought in the field of elderly access to housing is that no piece of UN legislation explicitly addresses elderly people. It is a question whether elderly people in need of home modifications or other such protections may utilise the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This could be possible due to certain shared interests by elderly people in need of mobility support, modifications of their homes, or other implications of physical disability in relation to others with disabilities. (Spencer, 2009) However, this strategy of protection requires careful consideration due to the ethical implications that come with the inference that an older person in need of housing modification is therefore considered legally ‘disabled’ and the effects that these implications may have on both disabled communities and older populations.

Conclusion

Overall, while there has been a considerable increase in recognition of the housing implications for ageing populations, the soft-law policies that have addressed these issues so far lack specificity and implementability. Pension inequalities have contributed to an ever-increasing ‘wealthfare’ gap between those for whom accessible homeownership is affordable and those for whom it is not.

With illiquid wealth tied to dwellings and an upward trend in the number of elderly people in private rentals, human rights legislation needs to reflect the changing housing landscape and strengthen protections for middle-class pensioners in inflexible housing situations. These issues also must be addressed with intersectionality, with studies showing that women, the disabled, and people of colour are the least likely to achieve homeownership, and due to these barriers to entry, are significantly less likely to achieve homeownership later in life.

Disabled elderly people also face heavy financial burdens due to their pensions, which exclude them from government welfare schemes. Additionally, a large majority of housing has been reported to be inadequate, with very few homes being ‘ageing-ready’. The MIPAA incorporates a ‘developmental’ and ‘intergenerational life-course’ approach to ageing to promote equity and inclusiveness. While this document acknowledges many issues in housing accessibility and inequalities and was one of the first documents of its kind on the subject, its scope of implementation and, consequently, protections have been limited. Similarly, the General Comments from the CESCR provide both general and specific recognition across documents, but when specificity and implementation are lacking, minimal protection can be provided.