Rural Oregon has incomes on par with rural America, however local housing costs are 20-30 percent higher, resulting in an affordability crunch.

1. Rural Housing
Affordability
Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
March 2018

2. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
2
Rural Housing Affordability (Price to Income Ratio)
Data: American CommunitySurvey,2012-2016 Estimates
Source: Census,Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
Map Template:www.clearlyandsimply.com
60-80th Percentile
(2.5-3.1)
80-90th Percentile
(3.1-3.7)
90th+ Percentile
(>3.7)
Urban County
< 20th Percentile
(<1.9)
20-40th Percentile
(1.9-2.2)
40-60th Percentile
(2.2-2.5)

3. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Frequency
Rural Price to Income Ratio
Median Household Income to Median Home Value Ratio
Morrow Harney
Gilliam
Umatilla
Jefferson
Wheeler
Lake
Baker
Klamath
Malheur
Sherman
Union
Wasco
Grant
Douglas
Coos
Crook
Wallowa
Tillamook
Clatsop
Lincoln
Curry
Hood River
Red Letter Counties are in
the 80th percentile or higher
Data: 2012-2016 American Community Survey | Source: Census, Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
0
100
200
300
400
500
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1
Frequency
Rural Lower Income Rental Households
Households with Incomes <$50,000
Share of Households Spending 30%+ on Rent
Wheeler
Baker
Grant
Lake
Umatilla
Harney
Morrow
Gilliam
Jefferson
Wasco
Union
Wallowa
Coos
Klamath
Crook
Douglas
Hood River
Lincoln
Sherman
Clatsop
Tillamook
Malheur
Curry
Data: 2012-2016 American Community Survey | Source: Census, Oregon Office of Economic Analysis
Rural Oregon household incomes are in-line with rural
America’s household incomes. However, rural Oregon
home values are 30% higher and monthly rents are 16%
higher. As such, the majority of Oregon’s rural counties
face housing costs, relative to incomes, that are among
the 10-20% worst in the nation. Such housing cost
problems are also on par with many of the least-
affordable urban areas nationwide as well.

4. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
4
Rural Oregon’s higher housing costs are not due to a more modern mix of construction.
Newer units are more expensive, so if rural Oregon has seen more new construction in
recent decades, then the topline cost figures may mask a composition issue. This does
not appear to be the case. Rural Oregon’s housing costs are higher for every age of the
housing stock. Furthermore, the age of rural Oregon’s housing stock is essentially
identical to rural America’s.

5. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
5
Since 2000, rural Oregon’s population growth has been
twice as fast as rural America’s population growth.
However, rural Oregon’s new construction has been about
30% lower, adjusting for population growth. This would be
OK if rural Oregon had a higher vacancy rate to
accommodate new residents. This was not the case. Rural
Oregon’s vacancy rate in 2000 was slightly less than rural
America’s. Today, rural Oregon’s vacancy rate is
significantly lower than rural America’s. This implies the
relative lack of new construction coupled with stronger
population growth resulted in a lower vacancy rate, which,
everything else equal, pushes up prices.
Note: The base year here is 2000 due to readily available data. Beginning in
1980 or 1990 would be better, however requires more data work.

6. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
6
Scenic Destinations Face
Especially Difficult Challenges

7. Oregon Office of
Economic Analysis
7
joshua.lehner@oregon.gov
(503) 378-4052
www.OregonEconomicAnalysis.com
@OR_EconAnalysis
Questions and Contact