Peer-Reviewed Scholarship

THE WORK OF LANDLORD TECHNOLOGY: The Fictions of Frictionless Property Management

by Erin McElroy

Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, May 8, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/02637758241232758.

Landlord technology—or the systems used by landlords to control and regulate tenant lives, spaces, and data—frequently promises “frictionless” building management and residential experiences. Yet services such as “digital doormen” and virtual property management platforms often create more work for tenants, particularly regarding decreased accessibility for tenants of color whose faces are unrecognized by biased algorithms used to administer building access, and for renters who are unable to or who refuse to use new apps and web portals. There are also “digital butlers” that landlords deploy as a means of attracting and retaining wealthy residents, yet that end up creating increased and often gendered work for those laboring behind the curtains of automation. Even virtual property management tools rely upon outsourced labor and are rife with contradictions and hardships for renters and call center workers alike. With a proposition that new forms of material and affective labor are created by landlord technologies despite promises of frictionless living, this article focuses on the various struggles that workers and tenants face in using, maintaining, refusing, and, at times, organizing against property automation. Based upon collaborative research produced with Landlord Tech Watch, as well as ethnographic accounting of housing and labor struggles in New York City and Cluj, this article introduces friction as a critical analytic useful in assessing the uneven, gendered, and racialized labor formations that landlord technologies require and reproduce despite fictions of frictionless living.

International Journal of Urban and Region Research, 47, no. 1 (2023): 54–70.

In this article I place tenant screening data grabbing practices in tension with the ongoing work of housing justice-based tool making. While the tenant screening industry has spent decades amassing eviction data to facilitate the blocklisting of tenants with prior eviction records and thereby reifying racial capitalist geographies, housing organizers today rely on some of this same data to illuminate evictor networks and organize anti-eviction campaigns. This has been particularly important in the wake of corporate landlordism in which evictions are executed through opaque shell companies. Tenant-made tools attempt to undo this uneven landscape in which landlords own troves of data about tenants, but in which tenants don’t even know their own landlords’ names. While opening up all eviction data to the public might appear to be an antidote, doing so can also provide screening companies with even more data to use in blocklisting. In my examination of this conjuncture, I forge the analytic of dis/possessory data politics to map out the violence of tenant screening data predation while also problematizing the technoliberal impulse to open up all eviction data. Yet dis/possessory data politics also attest to care and coalition work marked by practices of possession beyond logics of theft, banishment and techno solutionism.

Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 40(4), 607–626.

This paper focuses on surveillance technologies that New York City landlords have been installing in low-income, public, and affordable tenant housing over the last decade. It looks at how new forms of biometric and facial recognition-based landlord technology automate gentrification and carcerality, reproducing racist systems of recognition and displacement. We offer these systems a genealogy and geography, looking at intersections of zoning, gentrification, eviction, and policing that have historically solidified to dispossess and incarcerate tenants of color. Additionally, this paper addresses how and why New York City has emerged as the world’s epicenter of “landlord tech,” mapping out several decades of urban datafication that have rendered low-income, nonwhite majority housing complexes as laboratories for surveillance experimentations today. We observe how processes of “catching” tenants for lease violations automate a longer history of racist surveillance and property-making. Yet we also highlight tenant-led resistance that has successfully thwarted facial recognition deployment and that continues to organize for landlord tech abolition today. Through affective organizing, grounded relationality, and alliance-building, tenants have created vital abolitionist space and knowledge to curb landlord technologies and the carceral logics they encode.

Housing Policy Debate, DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2022.2113815

This research studies how tenant screening services’ presentation of information influences landlord decisions. Tenant screening services utilize criminal records, eviction records, and credit score databases to produce reports that landlords use to inform their decisions about who to rent to. However, little is known about how landlords assess the information presented by tenant screening reports. Through a behavioral experiment with landlords using simulated tenant screening reports, this study shows that landlords use blanket screening policies, that they conflate the existence of tenant records with outcomes (e.g., eviction filings with executed evictions), and that they display, on average, tendencies toward automation bias that are influenced by the risk assessments and scores presented by tenant screening reports. I argue that maintaining blanket screening policies and automation bias, combined with the downstream effects of creating and using racially biased eviction and criminal records, means that people of color will inevitably experience disproportionate exclusion from rental housing due to perceived “risk” on the part of landlords.