Peer-Reviewed Scholarship

UNDOING LANDLORD TECHNOLOGY: Beyond the Propertied Logics of the Pandemic Past and Present

by Erin McElroy

Technocreep and the Politics of Things Not Seen, edited by Neda Atanasoski and Nassim Parvin. Duke University Press, 2025

New and emerging technologies, especially ones that infiltrate intimate spaces, relations, homes, and bodies, are often referred to as creepy in media and political discourses. In Technocreep and the Politics of Things Not Seen, Neda Atanasoski and Nassim Parvin introduce a feminist theory of creep that they substantiate through critical engagement with smart homes, smart dust, smart desires, and smart forests toward dreams of feminist futures. Contributing authors further illuminate what is otherwise obscured, assumed, or dismissed in characterizations of technology as creepy or creeping. Considering diverse technologies such as border surveillance and China’s credit system to sexcams and home assistants, the volume’s essays and artworks demonstrate that the potentials and pitfalls of artificial intelligence and digital and robotic technologies cannot be assessed through binaries of seeing/being seen, privacy/surveillance, or harmful/useful. Together, their multifaceted and multimodal approach transcends such binaries, accounting for technological relations that exceed sight to include touch, presence, trust, and diverse modes of collectivity. As such, this volume develops creep as a feminist analytic and creative mode on par with technology’s complex entanglement with intimate, local, and global politics.

AGAINST LANDLORD TECHNOLOGY IN SAN FRANCISCO

By Erin McElroy, Matthew Martignoni, Jeantelle Laberinto, Priya Prabhakar, and Joseph Smooke

In Dispatches from the Threshold: Tenant Power in Times of Crisis, edited by Rae Baker and Alexander Ferrer, 95–107. Fernwood Publishing, 2025.

Dispatches from the Threshold is an emergent archive of the burgeoning movement for housing justice in North America and beyond.

Housing insecurity turned catastrophic during the COVID-19 pandemic, exposing the cruelty of threadbare tenant protections and state hostility toward unhoused people made worse by mass unemployment, a public health crisis, and racist police violence. Since 2020, tenants have successfully fought back against evictions and encampment policing, pushed their governments to extend and fortify eviction moratoria, strengthened tenants’ rights and protections for unhoused people, and thought beyond strategies that primarily appease landlords and lenders. At the same time, the urgent work of stemming immediate eviction, displacement, and surveillance has sat in tension with long-haul movement work and cross-movement organizing.

This book brings together activists, scholars, and legal practitioners directly involved in tenant organizing to contextualize and catalogue the traction and tensions of the movement across seventeen cities in five countries. Contributors connect housing justice to struggles against criminalization, surveillance, and policing, and to debates about social reproduction, precarity, organized labour, abolitionist praxis, and political strategy. These dispatches are as much a chronicle of organizing in a moment of crisis as an invitation to build solidarities across movements to ensure enduring justice for all.

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.

ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 21, no. 4 (May 5, 2022): 357–71.

This paper examines the materiality of digitally mapping eviction and landlord geographies, focusing on struggles and contradictions that critical GIS and counter-mapping collectives encounter in attempting to produce data, maps, and tools useful for housing justice organizing. I look at how public restrictions of parcel ownership and eviction data, along with limited accessibility of free and open source mapping software, often instantiate increased reliance upon technocapitalist data and infrastructure. Many of these systems are precipitative of gentrification geographies, thereby at odds with the politics of anti-displacement mapping. Meanwhile, there are a growing number of cartographic labs and companies that produce geospatial data related to evictions and property ownership, but that prioritize data accumulation and scalability over grounded housing justice. By exploring paradoxes within this space, I theorize the conjuncture of datafied property and propertied data landscapes.Homing in on San Francisco landscapes of the Tech Boom 2.0., I draw upon my own experience working with the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project and partner groups. I conclude by looking to housing justice and land rematriation practices based upon grounded relationalities–models that offer emancipatory trajectories for digitally mapping property and dispossession.

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.

PROPERTY AS TECHNOLOGY

by Erin McElroy

City 24, no. 1–2 (2020): 112–29.

This article considers how private property functions as a technology of racial dispossession upon gentrifying terrains, particularly in San Francisco amidst its ‘Tech Boom 2.0.’ By engaging with collective work produced with the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project (AEMP), by reading the film, The Last Black Man in San Francisco, and by foregrounding critical race studies and urban studies literature, I decenter the novelty of technology in contemporary times. Rather, I consider how property itself has long served as a technology of racial dispossession, constituting a palimpsest for the contemporary gentrifying moment. This, I suggest, is particularly pertinent in theorizing the anti-Blackness of Tech 2.0 urbanism and its new instantiations of property technology, platform real estate, residential surveillance, eviction, and speculation. Thus, I argue that studies of techno-urbanism would do well to consider temporalities outside of their often-reified present. Yet at the same time, I look to community-based projects such as the AEMP which seek to repurpose geospatial technologies and data in order to produce emancipatory propertied futures, for instance, those of expropriation and decommodification. How might studies produced outside of the academy and the real estate industry alike serve as technologies for housing justice? How might practices such as these act as counterweights to property as a technology of racial dispossession?