Sheltering Hope: The Impact of Housing Aid for Syrian Refugees in Jordan

A study by Princeton University, IRC, and J-PAL examined a housing subsidy program for Syrian refugees in Jordan, finding that while it improved short-term housing stability, financial security, and mental well-being, the benefits faded post-program. It also found minimal negative spillover effects on Jordanian neighbors, suggesting well-designed aid can support refugees without fueling local resentment.

A team of researchers from Princeton University, the International Rescue Committee (IRC), and the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) conducted an extensive study on the impact of a housing subsidy program for Syrian refugees in Jordan. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate whether financial assistance improved refugee living conditions, economic stability, and mental well-being while also examining its effects on Jordanian neighbors. The study followed participants across multiple survey rounds—midline, endline, and a follow-up 1.5 years after the program concluded offering valuable insights into both short-term benefits and long-term sustainability.

Transforming Housing Conditions for Refugees

The housing subsidy program was designed to address the critical housing challenges faced by Syrian refugees, many of whom struggled to find stable and affordable accommodations. The intervention provided direct rental assistance for nine to eighteen months, covering payments to landlords on behalf of refugee families. Some homes also received structural improvements, ensuring better living conditions. The objective was to alleviate financial burdens, allowing families to redirect their limited resources to essential needs like food, healthcare, and education. The program significantly improved housing stability, reducing the risk of eviction and enhancing the quality of living spaces. However, researchers found that while the subsidies temporarily relieved financial strain, they did not create lasting economic security. Once the program ended, some families struggled to maintain the same level of housing quality, highlighting the need for longer-term solutions.

Economic Security: A Temporary Relief

Beyond housing, the study explored how rental assistance affected refugees’ overall financial well-being. Initially, families reported improvements in their economic conditions, with increased spending on food, healthcare, and other essentials. The subsidies provided a buffer against financial hardship, allowing families to avoid extreme poverty during the intervention period. However, these gains were not always sustained. As the financial aid phased out, many families experienced a decline in food security and financial stability. The study suggests that while direct rental support can provide short-term relief, it is not a comprehensive solution to long-term economic challenges. The findings highlight the importance of complementary policies, such as employment programs and vocational training, to help refugees secure independent livelihoods.

Mental Health and Social Stability

The research also examined the psychological impact of the housing program on refugee families. Many participants reported moderate reductions in stress and depressive symptoms, indicating that stable housing played a role in improving mental health. The assurance of having a secure home contributed to a sense of stability and well-being. However, the mental health benefits were not uniformly sustained, with some families experiencing renewed psychological distress once the program ended. Among children, socio-emotional health showed some positive shifts, but the improvements were inconsistent across all households. The study underscores the need for broader interventions beyond housing assistance, including mental health services and community support programs, to address the psychological challenges refugees face in prolonged displacement.

Impact on Host Communities and Policy Implications

One of the most critical aspects of this study was assessing the effects of refugee aid on Jordanian neighbors. In displacement settings, there is often concern that refugee assistance programs might generate resentment among host communities, particularly when resources appear to be directed away from local populations. However, this research found minimal evidence of negative spillover effects. Social attitudes toward refugees remained largely unchanged, and there was no significant increase in hostility or economic tension. In some cases, Jordanian neighbors even showed greater policy support for refugee aid, challenging the assumption that financial assistance for refugees automatically breeds local resentment. Additionally, the study found no significant impact on local rental markets, dispelling fears that the subsidy program would drive up housing costs for Jordanian tenants.

Beyond its immediate findings, the study contributes to the broader policy debate on refugee assistance. The results suggest that while financial support programs improve short-term conditions, sustainable refugee integration requires a more comprehensive approach. One recommendation is to facilitate refugee access to employment opportunities, enabling them to achieve economic independence rather than relying on humanitarian aid. Many displaced populations face legal and bureaucratic barriers that prevent them from entering the workforce, leaving them in perpetual dependence on external assistance. The findings advocate for policies that allow refugees to contribute to local economies in ways that also benefit host communities, fostering economic growth and social cohesion.

The research further highlights the importance of designing aid programs that minimize potential social tensions. One of the reasons this particular intervention did not generate backlash was its discreet nature—subsidies were directed to landlords rather than being visibly distributed to refugees. This model may offer a valuable lesson for policymakers seeking to implement effective, politically viable refugee support programs.

Ultimately, the study provides a nuanced perspective on refugee aid, demonstrating that while financial assistance can alleviate immediate hardships, it does not necessarily lead to long-term self-sufficiency. Policymakers must consider a multi-faceted approach that includes housing security, economic opportunities, mental health support, and social integration. The findings emphasize that successful refugee assistance programs should not only provide relief but also create pathways toward long-term stability, benefiting both displaced populations and host communities alike.