Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Jamestown Foundation Issues Commentary: Russia Balances Relationship With Iran and Other Gulf States
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by foreign affairs analyst Fuad Shahbazov in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor:* * *
Russia Balances Relationship with Iran and Other Gulf States
Executive Summary:
* Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg on April 27 about the ongoing conflict in and around Iran. The visit highlighted the two states' Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, signed in January 2025.
* Russia has reaped some economic benefits from Iran's closure ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by foreign affairs analyst Fuad Shahbazov in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor: * * * Russia Balances Relationship with Iran and Other Gulf States Executive Summary: * Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg on April 27 about the ongoing conflict in and around Iran. The visit highlighted the two states' Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, signed in January 2025. * Russia has reaped some economic benefits from Iran's closureof the Strait of Hormuz, which raised oil demand and prices and caused the United States to ease sanctions on Russian oil already at sea. If Moscow shows robust military support for Iran, however, it risks damaging economic and diplomatic ties with other Gulf states.
* Russia is constrained from acting as a main mediator in the Iran conflict due to its war against Ukraine. The Iran conflict also endangers key trade corridors, including the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), which links Russia and Iran via the Caucasus.
-
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met Russian President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg on April 27 to discuss the ongoing conflict in and around Iran (The Moscow Times; Interfax, April 27). Araghchi's visit to Moscow highlighted the two states' Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty--which Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed in January 2025--and raised questions about how Moscow benefits from the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran (President of Russia, April 21, 2025). During the meeting, Putin praised the Iranian people for "fighting for their independence and sovereignty" (President of Russia, April 27). Moscow aims to secure benefits from the Hormuz Strait crisis to gain additional leverage in negotiations on its war against Ukraine.
Russia's support for Iran could sour its relations with wealthy Gulf monarchies. Russia has sought to benefit from the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran that began on February 28, particularly following the closure of the Strait of Hormuz (Anadolu Ajansi, June 5). Iran's decision to close the strait by planting naval mines, deploying coastal missile batteries, and drone swarms surged global energy prices, causing mid-term disruption of the supply chain (see EDM, March 16). Moscow has viewed Tehran as its main ally in the Middle East for many years, providing military and financial assistance amid long-term international sanctions.
The conflict in Iran disrupted international crude oil trade, triggering fuel shortages in the Asian market. Russia has benefited from this shortage, which has increased demand for its oil and gas. After pressure from Asian countries, the United States opted to ease sanctions on Moscow's seaborne oil exports as of March 12, allowing purchases of Russian oil that are stranded on tankers at sea (Meduza, March 13). Washington intended the move to mitigate global energy price spikes. Russia was able to take advantage of increased oil demand and eased sanctions by selling down some of the 140 million barrels of oil stranded at sea due to sanctions.
Russia fears that a protracted conflict will jeopardize key projects in Iran. Among them are the Bushehr nuclear power plant, which has been repeatedly struck during the conflict, the Sirik thermal power station, and the ZN Vostok initiatives aimed at developing Iranian oil fields (Vedemosti, March 14, 2018; Russiri.ru, June 10, 2021; Profile.ru, April 9; RBC, April 14). Equally concerning is the disruption of the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), the principal trade artery linking Moscow and Tehran through the South Caucasus, whose functionality is now at risk. Russia has occasionally attempted to act as a mediator in the Iran conflict, while also seeking to secure economic and political benefits from it (TASS, April 1). Given its partnership with Iran and ongoing war against Ukraine, however, Moscow was not seriously considered as the key intermediary.
Moscow's war against Ukraine prevents it from mediating other peace processes. Moscow may seek to supply Iran with more weaponry, namely MANPADs and one-way drones, in addition to providing targeting intelligence for Iranian missiles and drones (IST, April 24). Russia's close ties with Iran's political establishment, particularly the senior leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), allow the Kremlin to attempt to position itself as a diplomatic channel between the other Gulf states and Tehran amid Iranian strikes on their energy and military infrastructure. On February 28, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov held a call with Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani regarding the U.S.-Israeli Operation Epic Fury (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, February 2). In the following days, Putin held calls with the leaders of Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Saudi Arabia, and Lavrov spoke with Oman's foreign minister.
Moscow is no longer positioning itself as a primary mediator in the Iran conflict. On May 18, Lavrov stated that Moscow is "not trying to enter this negotiation process," adding that it does not try to interfere with the process between the United States and Iran and wishes it success (RT, May 18). Russia remains hesitant to provide robust military support to the Iranian regime as it struggles in its war against Ukraine. Such a restrained posture, especially considering Putin's failure to meaningfully assist partners in Syria and Venezuela, may further delegitimize Moscow's promises to its other partners (see EDM, April 6).
Russia recognizes Iran's value as a partner and hopes to preserve its role within broader geopolitics. Iran's ideological and political importance to Russia, however, does not outweigh the strategic value of the wealthy Gulf states, given Moscow's existing infrastructure projects and economic agreements with them. For instance, on May 12, Saudi Arabia and Russia elevated their partnership by introducing a visa-free regime for up to 90 days, a step designed to deepen economic cooperation and expand mutual tourism (Asharq Al-Awsat, May 12). Trade between the UAE and Russia is more than double that between Russia and Iran (Riddle, April 24). The Iran conflict poses challenges for Moscow, disrupting regional trade and energy infrastructure and forcing it to make risky calculations in a changeable regional environment.
* * *
Fuad Shahbazov is an independent foreign affairs analyst.
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/russia-balances-relationship-with-iran-and-other-gulf-states/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center on Budget & Policy Priorities: Addressing the Housing Affordability Crisis Requires Increasing Housing Supply and Expanding Rental Assistance
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following report on June 10, 2026, by Will Fischer, director of Housing Policy and a senior fellow:* * *
Addressing the Housing Affordability Crisis Requires Increasing Housing Supply and Expanding Rental Assistance
Everyone should have access to a stable, affordable home, but for millions of people this goal lies out of reach due to high housing costs. While building more homes must be a central component of efforts to address the housing affordability crisis, by itself it won't reduce housing costs enough to bring ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities issued the following report on June 10, 2026, by Will Fischer, director of Housing Policy and a senior fellow: * * * Addressing the Housing Affordability Crisis Requires Increasing Housing Supply and Expanding Rental Assistance Everyone should have access to a stable, affordable home, but for millions of people this goal lies out of reach due to high housing costs. While building more homes must be a central component of efforts to address the housing affordability crisis, by itself it won't reduce housing costs enough to bringthem within reach for people with low incomes, who struggle the most to afford housing. Achieving a real solution will also require expanding rental assistance.
Rents and home prices have risen rapidly in recent years, squeezing family budgets up and down the income scale. High housing costs pose especially difficult burdens for people with very low incomes, who frequently spend half or more of their income on housing. Many families have little left over for other necessities after paying for housing and are one setback away from eviction and homelessness.
The recent surge in housing costs was driven in substantial part by deep housing shortages that persist in many areas. But large numbers of people struggled to afford housing even before this surge, and addressing housing shortages is only part of the solution. Most households with incomes around or below the poverty line ($27,320 for a three-person household in 2026) -- a group that includes large numbers of workers in low-paying jobs, seniors, people with disabilities, and others -- can't afford rents sufficient even to cover the ongoing costs of operating rental housing, such as maintenance, utilities, and insurance. No matter how many units are built or how much construction costs are subsidized, this won't be enough to enable owners to reduce rents below the break-even amount needed to cover their operating costs.
Housing vouchers and other rental assistance close the gap between the cost of housing and what households can afford. Rental assistance has proven highly effective at enabling people with very low incomes to afford stable housing. But only 1 in 4 low-income households who need rental assistance receive it due to inadequate funding, and there are long waiting lists for assistance. Policymakers should expand rental assistance toward the goal of guaranteeing it for everyone in need.
Added rental assistance will be more efficient and impactful if we also build more homes, since increased supply can reduce costs and expand housing choices for assisted households along with other renters and homebuyers. But policymakers should not wait for a supply expansion to be completed before extending rental assistance to many more people -- and there is no need to wait, since tens of millions of people need help now to afford their current home.
Policymakers should act simultaneously to increase housing supply and expand rental assistance as part of a comprehensive strategy that includes other key measures, such as strengthening tenant rights and improving the homelessness response system. Taken together, these steps can ease growth in rents and home prices for everyone while sharply reducing severe hardship among people with low incomes.
More Homes Needed to Make Room for All, Slow Cost Increases
Housing is the largest expenditure in the average family's budget, and rapid growth in rents and home purchase prices has made it harder for people across the country to afford housing.[2] Housing costs have outpaced overall inflation for most of the last decade, with a particularly sharp spike from late 2020 to late 2022, when rents increased by 24 percent[3] and median home prices by 31 percent.[4] The growth rate has since slowed, but housing costs remain near record levels as a share of household income.[5]
Supply Increases Can Reduce Cost Pressures
A shortage of homes has been a central factor driving up rents and home prices. Estimates of the size of the shortage vary, with one finding that as of early 2025, 2 million additional units were needed to balance supply and demand.[6] The shortage has eased over time; the national rental vacancy rate rose from 5.6 percent in early 2022 -- the lowest in several decades -- to 7.3 percent in the first quarter of 2026.[7] But vacancy rates vary considerably across the nation, and some regions, including several of the largest metropolitan areas, still face major housing shortages.
Building more homes can restrain housing inflation and, under some circumstances, push rents and home prices down to some degree.[8] For example, after a surge in construction, mid-market rents in Austin, Texas, fell by 11 percent between September 2022 and September 2025, reversing over one-third of the 29 percent increase in the two years before that.[9]
Policymakers Should Take Action to Address Housing Shortages
Policymakers should act aggressively to promote supply increases in places that need more homes. Perhaps most importantly, state and local governments should use their broad authority over zoning and permitting to allow more construction -- particularly of multifamily and small single-family homes, which are more likely to be affordable to middle- and low-income households. But the federal government can also play a key role, for example by:
* subsidizing affordable housing development;
* streamlining federal regulations in cases where they unnecessarily impede construction;
* supporting and incentivizing improvements to state and local housing policies; and
* funding research into innovative construction practices with the potential to reduce costs.[10]
In 2025, Congress passed an expansion of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), the largest federal affordable housing development program; the expansion is expected to subsidize 1.2 million added units during the first ten years.[11] Congress is also considering a major bipartisan housing bill with numerous additional measures intended to support supply. This bill, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, would, for example, ease certain financial regulations that have restricted bank investments in affordable housing and streamline environmental requirements that have slowed housing development.[12]
Policymakers should build on these efforts, including by reversing harmful Trump Administration actions that make it harder to build housing. Many of the workers who build the nation's housing are immigrants, so the Administration's violent, sweeping immigration detention and deportation dragnet is worsening already substantial shortages of construction labor, in addition to harming people and communities around the county.[13] Also, the Administration's tariffs have driven up the cost of imported building supplies, from lumber to electrical components.[14]
* * *
Increasing Housing Supply Can Also Promote Related Goals
In addition to expanding the overall number of housing units and increasing affordability, supply-focused policies can and should advance other policy goals, including:
* Expanding housing choice by providing people with low incomes access to housing in a wide range of neighborhoods, including homes that are suitable for families with children and are located near high-performing schools.
* Improving housing access by making more units accessible to people of all ages and ability levels, including people with mobility or sensory disabilities.
* Advancing environmental sustainability by building housing that is energy and water efficient, located near transit, or designed to be resilient in the face of climate-related disasters.
* Developing "social housing" that is permanently affordable and provides tenants a strong role in building management.
* Preserving the existing affordable housing stock by renovating public and other subsidized housing.
* Meeting needs in tribal and rural areas by addressing housing shortages and substandard housing.
* * *
Building Alone Won't Solve Housing Affordability Crisis
Expanding supply alone, however, can't solve the housing affordability crisis. It will rarely reduce housing costs to levels that are affordable to people with incomes around or below the poverty line, who are by far the most likely to struggle to afford housing.
Housing-Related Hardship Concentrated Among Lowest-Income People
In 2024, 25 million people lived in households that paid more than 50 percent of their income for rent, far above the 30 percent of income that is considered affordable under a benchmark widely used by government programs and the private sector.
* * *
Figure 1: Most Severely Cost-Burdened Renters Have Extremely Low Incomes
* * *
More than 70 percent of them -- 17 million people -- were in what the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) terms "extremely low-income" households, meaning those with income below the federal poverty line or 30 percent of the local median, whichever is higher. (See Figure 1.)[15] This group includes people of all races and ethnicities, but because of a long history of discrimination in housing, employment, and other areas, they are disproportionately likely to be Black, Latino, or Native American. A large majority of extremely low-income renter households are headed by a low-paid worker, a senior, or a person with a disability. (See Figure 2.)[16]
It is not surprising that many working families struggle to afford housing. Median wages in 17 of the 25 most common occupations in the United States -- such as retail sales workers, building cleaners, nursing aides, and administrative assistants -- are too low to enable a full-time worker to afford typical rents even for a one-bedroom unit.[17]
* * *
Figure 2: Most Extremely Low-Income Renters Work, Are Seniors, or Have a Disability
* * *
For people with extremely low incomes, unaffordable housing costs can cause hardship far more severe than that faced by middle-income households. High housing costs often leave them with little money for anything else, forcing them to accumulate debt or divert funds from food, medicine, or other basic needs to pay the rent. Close to 1 million renter households live in homes with severely substandard conditions (such as a lack of reliable heat, electricity, or plumbing), frequently because they can't afford safer, healthier homes.[18]
Many low-income renters are one setback away -- a car breakdown, reduction in work hours, or administrative snafu that delays a Social Security check -- from falling behind on their rent and incurring late fees that make it even harder to make ends meet. Millions of people are displaced from their homes each year, including about 4 million annually who are formally evicted.[19] An estimated 4.3 million people with low incomes live doubled up in overcrowded conditions,[20] arrangements that are often unstable and sometimes unsafe. More than 740,000 people had no home as of HUD's most recent available single-night count of national homelessness, conducted in January 2025.[21]
Supply-Side Policies Can't Make Rents Affordable to Lowest-Income People
The problems described above all stem from the large gap between typical market rents and the amount that households with the lowest incomes can afford. In 2024, the median extremely low-income renter household had an annual income of $12,300, enough to afford $308 per month (30 percent of their income) in rent. But the median rent nationally was close to five times higher, at $1,487 per month. As a result, even unusually large supply-driven rent reductions (like the 11 percent decline in Austin noted earlier) won't come close to enabling households at this income level to afford typical market rents.
Development subsidies such as LIHTC that help cover construction costs can reduce rents, but they rarely make housing affordable to the lowest-income households unless the household also receives a voucher or other assistance to help them pay the rent. LIHTC allows rents to be set as high as 30 percent of the income of a household whose income is 60 percent of the area median, meaning an extremely low-income household would have to pay up to twice what they can actually afford for that "affordable" unit. Only about 3 percent of LIHTC units are rented at an affordable cost to households with incomes below 30 percent of the area median who do not have rental assistance.[22]
One reason it is so difficult for supply-focused strategies to make housing affordable to the lowest-income households is that most such households don't have enough income to afford rents sufficient to cover the ongoing costs of operating rental housing, such as maintenance, utilities, and insurance -- even before including any return on investment for the owner or payments on debt incurred to build or purchase the building. The median rental unit in a 2024 industry survey had a monthly operating cost of $665, almost double the $308 that the median extremely low-income household could afford.[23] (See Figure 3.)
* * *
Figure 3: Many of the Lowest-Income Households Can't Afford Rent Sufficient to Cover Housing Operating Costs
* * *
No matter how many units are built or how much construction costs are subsidized, this won't be enough to enable owners to reduce rents below the break-even amount needed to cover their operating costs. And consequently, it won't be enough to make rents affordable to millions of people in extremely low-income households.
* * *
Figure 4: Homelessness Has Persisted as Market Swung Between Surplus and Shortage
* * *
This helps explain why high levels of housing-related hardship have persisted for decades even as the housing market has swung between shortages and surpluses. (See Figure 4.) The number of people experiencing homelessness has never fallen below 550,000 since HUD began its annual count in 2007, and it exceeded 620,000 from 2007 to 2011 even though vacancy rates were at or near all-time highs.[24] Similarly, the number of very low-income renter households with what HUD terms "worst-case needs," meaning they paid over half their income for housing or lived in severely substandard homes, peaked at 8.53 million in 2021 but was nearly the same -- 8.48 million -- as far back as 2011.[25]
In short, if large numbers of people lack the resources to pay rent that's sufficient to cover the cost of operating and maintaining housing, adding more units alone could make only a modest dent in problems like eviction and homelessness. Solving the affordable housing crisis will also require ensuring that everyone has the means to afford housing.
Expanding Rental Assistance Would Sharply Cut Homelessness and Hardship
Rental assistance programs such as housing vouchers help people with low incomes afford housing by covering the gap between the rent for a modest housing unit and 30 percent of the family's income. A large body of rigorous research shows that housing vouchers are highly effective at reducing homelessness, housing instability, overcrowding, and exposure to substandard housing.[26] (See Figure 5.)
* * *
Figure 5: Rental Assistance Sharply Reduces Homelessness and Other Hardship
* * *
Moreover, because a stable home is so foundational to people's well-being, the benefits of rental assistance spill over into other aspects of a family's life. Studies have found that rental assistance reduces foster care placements, domestic violence, hypertension among adults, sleep problems among children, and the frequency with which students must move from one school to another.[27] And, when housing vouchers enable families with young children to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods, they sharply increase the chances those children will go to college, as well as their average earnings as adults.[28]
Despite these striking benefits, only 1 in 4 low-income households who need rental assistance receive it because assistance is capped by the amount of funding Congress appropriates each year. Most people seeking help to address pressing housing needs are consequently turned away or placed on years-long waiting lists. (See Figure 6.) In contrast, other major programs that help people with low incomes cover basic needs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), make assistance available to all eligible households.
* * *
Figure 6: Small Share of Eligible Households Receive Rental Assistance and Often After Long Wait
* * *
Recent federal measures seeking to address the housing affordability crisis have emphasized supply rather than addressing the need for more rental assistance. While Congress enacted a large expansion of LIHTC in 2025, there has been no comparable expansion of rental assistance in recent years. Instead, tight funding caused the number of families receiving assistance to decline in 2025, and the Trump Administration and some congressional Republicans have sought deep cuts in rental assistance.[29] In addition, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing bill under consideration in Congress includes major policy changes designed to increase supply, but only modest reforms to the main federal rental assistance programs.
Solving the housing affordability crisis will require expanding rental assistance and ultimately guaranteeing it to everyone in need. Moving toward a rental assistance guarantee would have a transformational impact, ensuring that every family and individual can afford to meet their basic need for housing. Based on the research described above, a guarantee could be expected to sharply increase the number of children who are able to grow up in a stable home and cause rates of homelessness, eviction, and overcrowding to plummet.
Rental Assistance Expansion Should Phase in Over Time
These outcomes couldn't be achieved overnight. Policymakers should phase in a rental assistance expansion to give government administrative systems and local rental markets time to adapt, starting by extending assistance to the lowest-income portion of the eligible population. Guaranteeing rental assistance will likely require transitioning rental assistance from a "discretionary" program, where funding is set each year by Congress, to a "mandatory" program that adjusts automatically to serve all eligible households who apply (the approach used for Medicaid and SNAP).[30]
In addition, reforms will be needed to make rental assistance easier to use. For example, Congress should consider streamlining the voucher program's administrative requirements, such as easing inspection requirements when the risk of severe quality problems is low.[31] Congress should also fund a national demonstration to test providing assistance directly to tenants rather than to owners. Promising local research suggests this approach could further reduce administrative burdens and make it easier for families to use the assistance given some landlords' reluctance to accept vouchers.[32]
Expansions of Rental Assistance, Housing Supply Can Occur Together
Policymakers should expand rental assistance at the same time they enact measures to increase the supply of homes, as the two core elements of a comprehensive housing policy that makes housing more affordable for everyone.
Some observers have expressed concern that expanding rental assistance could drive up rents by adding to demand when the supply of housing is constrained. The best research indicates, however, that voucher expansions to date have had little overall impact on market rents.[33] This result is consistent with the effects predicted by economists who have carefully assessed the role of rental assistance in housing markets.[34] It appears to stem from several factors:
* Most people who receive vouchers, as well as most unassisted households who need rental assistance, already have homes but pay high shares of their income for rent. (See Figure 7.) Thus, they use rental assistance either to afford their current home or move to a different home that's more suitable -- neither of which adds to the number of units demanded in the market.
* * *
Figure 7: Most People Who Need Rental Assistance Have a Home But Struggle to Afford It
* * *
* Enabling people who would otherwise be homeless or doubled up to afford rent would create demand for more units, but rental markets have some capacity to absorb those added households just as they absorb other new renters. This is especially true outside the most constrained markets. In 2025, 62 of the 75 largest metropolitan areas had rental vacancy rates above 5 percent. Even in markets where it's relatively difficult to build housing, new households do not simply bid up rents for a fixed number of units; owners of land and buildings still respond to added demand by making more units available than they otherwise would -- just at a lower rate than in less supply-constrained markets.[35]
* The voucher program has administrative controls designed to keep vouchers from paying above-market rents that might contribute to inflation. Voucher subsidies are capped based on "fair market rents" estimated annually by HUD for units of a particular size in each metropolitan area and rural county. Also, housing agencies perform an additional "rent reasonableness" check to verify that rents paid by vouchers do not exceed those charged for similar units in the local market.[36]
To be sure, expanding rental assistance toward a guarantee would increase demand to some degree and put some upward pressure on rents, at least in tight markets. There is no way to enable the millions of people in the United States who sleep each night in tents, cars, motels, shelters, on the street, or doubled up in someone else's home to have stable housing without creating more households and more occupied units. But that is necessary if we are to solve our housing crisis and achieve the broadly shared goal of reducing homelessness and housing instability.
Any market impacts of a rental assistance expansion can be eased by phasing in the expansion alongside strong measures to expand supply like those discussed above. But the evidence suggests there is no need to wait for those measures to be completed before beginning to extend rental assistance to more people.
Other Steps Also Needed to Help Address Affordability Challenges
Expanding housing supply and providing rental assistance to ensure that everyone can afford a place to live are essential components of solving our housing affordability crisis, but policymakers should also take steps in important related areas, such as:
* Tenant rights. Addressing the precarious housing status of many renters requires not only helping them to afford rent, but also strengthening eviction safeguards, housing quality and habitability requirements, and other key tenant rights and protections.
* Homelessness response system. Solving homelessness will require investments and program reforms at the federal, state, and local levels to provide expanded supportive services, emergency homelessness prevention assistance, and improved shelter and interim housing options alongside additional rental assistance.
* Homeownership support. Rental assistance can help renters build savings for a down payment, and housing vouchers can also be used for ongoing homeownership costs under some circumstances. And building more housing (particularly smaller, single-family homes) will help more renters transition to homeownership. But expanding access to homeownership for people with low and moderate incomes -- and closing the large gap in homeownership rates between Black and white households created by redlining and other discriminatory policies -- will also require other measures, such as targeted down payment assistance or mortgages with reduced down payment requirements.
Together with expansions of rental assistance and the housing supply, reforms in these areas can move the nation toward the goal of enabling every person to have access to a safe, stable, affordable home that meets their needs.
* * *
Will Fischer, Senior Fellow and Director of Housing Policy
* * *
End Notes
[1] Mohammed Akel and Erik Gartland provided data analysis for this report.
[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Table 1110. Deciles of income before taxes: Annual expenditure means, shares, standard errors, and relative standard errors, Consumer Expenditure Surveys, 2024," https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables/calendar-year/mean-item-share-average-standard-error/cu-income-deciles-before-taxes-2024.xlsx.
[3] Zillow Observed Rent Index, https://www.zillow.com/research/data/?msockid=343d8789922e63bf22df936d937c6218, accessed May 26, 2026. The index reflects the average of rents for units in the 35th to 65th rent percentile among units listed for rent in the area, weighted to reflect the area's overall rental stock.
[4] Median sales price of houses sold for the United States, HUD and U.S. Census Bureau data via FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS.
[5] Joint Center for Housing Studies, "America's Rental Housing 2026," https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/americas-rental-housing-2026; Peyton Whitney, "Home Prices Surge to Five Times Median Income, Nearing Historic Highs," Joint Center for Housing Studies, October 6, 2025, https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/home-prices-surge-five-times-median-income-nearing-historic-highs.
[6] Cristian deRitis et al., "Bringing the Housing Shortage Into Sharper Focus," Moody's Analytics, July 2025, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2025-07/Bringing-Housing-Shortage-Into-Sharper-Focus.pdf.
[7] U.S. Census Bureau, Housing Vacancies and Homeownership Survey, https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/histtab1.xlsx.
[8] Vicki Been, Ingrid Gould Ellen, and Katherine M. O'Regan, "Supply Skepticism Revisited," Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 35, Issue 1, November 13, 2024, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4629628.
[9] Austin market data from Zillow Observed Rent Index, accessed May 26, 2026.
[10] Jared Bernstein et al., "Build, Baby, Build: A Plan to Lower Housing Costs for All," Center for American Progress, November 17, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/build-baby-build-a-plan-to-lower-housing-costs-for-all/.
[11] Peter Lawrence, "Final Reconciliation Bill Permanently Expands LIHTC, NMTC and OZ Incentive; but Does Not Include HTC Provisions," Novogradac, July 3, 2025, https://www.novoco.com/notes-from-novogradac/final-reconciliation-bill-permanently-expands-lihtc-nmtc-and-oz-incentive-but-does-not-include-htc-provisions.
[12] Emma Waters, Rebecca Orbach, and Kristen Klurfield, "What's in the House Amendment to the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act?" Bipartisan Policy Center, May 20, 2026, https://bipartisanpolicy.org/issue-brief/whats-in-the-house-amendment-to-the-21st-century-road-to-housing-act/.
[13] Association of General Contractors, "New Survey Finds Construction Workforce Shortages Are Leading Cause Of Project Delays As Immigration Enforcement Affects Nearly 1/3 Of Firms," September 23, 2025, https://news.agc.org/workforce-development/workforce-shortages-delay-projects/; Dee DePass, "Twin Cities Immigration Crackdown Delays Home Construction, Slows Real Estate Market," Minnesota Star Tribune, February 9, 2026, https://www.startribune.com/ice-immigration-crackdown-minneapolis-delaying-construction-new-home-builders-real-estate/601575566.
[14] Corey Husak, Natalie Baker, and Mimla Wardak, "Trump Administration Tariffs Could Result in 450,000 Fewer New Homes Through 2030," Center for American Progress, December 16, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trump-administration-tariffs-could-result-in-450000-fewer-new-homes-through-2030/; National Association of Home Builders, "How Tariffs Impact the Home Building Industry," https://www.nahb.org/advocacy/top-priorities/building-materials-trade-policy/how-tariffs-impact-home-building, accessed May 22, 2026.
[15] CBPP analysis of Census Bureau American Community Survey data.
[16] Dan Emmanuel et al., "The Gap : A Shortage of Affordable Homes," National Low-Income Housing Coalition, March 2026, https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/gap/2026/gap-report_2026_english.pdf.
[17] National Low Income Housing Coalition, "Out of Reach: The High Cost of Housing," 2025, https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/oor/2025_OOR_FullReport.pdf.
[18] Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), "Worst Case Needs: 2025 Report to Congress," July 2025, p 93, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/Worst-Case-Housing-Needs-2025-Report-to-Congress.html.
[19] Nick Graetz et al., "Who is Evicted in America," Eviction Lab, October 3, 2023, https://evictionlab.org/who-is-evicted-in-america/.
[20] CBPP analysis of Census Bureau American Community Survey data.
[21] HUD, "The 2025 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress," Part 1, May 2026, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2025-AHAR-Part-1.pdf.
[22] Dan Emmanuel and Andrew Aurand, "The Role of Vouchers in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program," Cityscape, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2024, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/cityscape/vol26num2/article11.html.
[23] See Erioreoluwa Bajomo, "From Momentum to Management: Navigating Elevated Costs in a Constrained Operating Environment," National Apartment Association, December 22, 2025, https://naahq.org/news/momentum-management-navigating-elevated-costs-constrained-operating-environment. Operating costs include items such as maintenance, repairs, administration, utilities, taxes, and insurance. They do not include costs associated with building the unit, buying the land, major renovations, or debt service on loans taken out to cover those capital costs.
[24] HUD, "2024 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report," Exhibit 1-1, p 2; Census Bureau Housing Vacancy and Homeownership Survey. While the homelessness response system mitigates homelessness, it cannot make up for the significant shortage of rental assistance to enable people to afford housing. Overall homelessness declined by 15 percent between 2007 and 2016, a period when the federal government and communities increasingly committed to rehousing people experiencing homelessness using rental assistance and voluntary supportive services and the inventory of permanent housing slots in the homelessness response system steadily grew. But local and regional homelessness response systems only had -- and continue to have -- sufficient resources to serve a fraction of people experiencing homelessness. Anna Bailey, Peggy Bailey, and Erik Gartland, "Policymakers Can Solve Homelessness by Scaling Up Proven Solutions: Rental Assistance and Supportive Services," CBPP, updated February 27, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/policymakers-can-solve-homelessness-by-scaling-up-proven-solutions-rental.
[25] HUD, "Worst Case Needs."
[26] Daniel Gubits et al., "Family Options Study: 3-Year Impacts of Housing and Services Interventions for Homeless Families," HUD, October 2016, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/Family-Options-Study-Full-Report.pdf; Sandra Newman et al., "Experimental Evidence Shows That Housing Vouchers Produce Measurable Benefits, Including Parental Stress Reduction," Health Affairs, February 5, 2024, https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2023.01020; Michele Wood, Jennifer Turnham, and Gregory Mills, "Housing Affordability and Family Well-Being: Results from the Housing Voucher Evaluation," Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 19, No. 2, January 2008, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252968087_Housing_Affordability_and_Family_Well-Being_Results_from_the_Housing_Voucher_Evaluation.
[27] Gubits et al.; Newman et al.
[28] Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren, and Lawrence Katz, "The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment," American Economic Review, April 2016, pp. 855-902. (This study was first released in 2015, see http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/images/mto_paper.pdf.)
[29] Sonya Acosta, "Congress Should Support Rental Assistance in 2027 to Prevent Increased Homelessness and Evictions," CBPP, May 13, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/congress-should-support-rental-assistance-in-2027-to-prevent-increased-homelessness-and.
[30] Sonya Acosta, "Three Principles for a Rental Assistance Guarantee," CBPP, October 2, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/three-principles-for-a-rental-assistance-guarantee.
[31] Will Fischer, "Making Rental Assistance Work Better for People Struggling to Afford Housing," CBPP, April 11, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/making-rental-assistance-work-better-for-people-struggling-to-afford-housing.
[32] Will Fischer, "Direct Rental Assistance Should Be Tested Through Local Pilots and a National Demonstration," CBPP, January 22, 2024, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/direct-rental-assistance-should-be-tested-through-local-pilots-and-a-national-demonstration; Vincent Reina et al., "PHL+ Housing Security Outcomes After Two Years," The Housing Initiative at Penn, August 2025, https://www.housinginitiative.org/phlhousing-housing-outcomes-at-two-years.html.
[33] Michael D. Eriksen and Amanda Ross, "Housing Vouchers and the Price of Rental Housing," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 7, No. 3, August 2015.
[34] See, for example, Jerome Rothenberg et al., "The Maze of Urban Housing Markets: Theory, Evidence and Practice," University of Chicago Press, 1991, pp. 293-305.
[35] Albert Saiz, "The Geographic Determinants of Housing Supply," Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 125, No. 3, August 2010. Along with building more units, owners may target a larger share of units as rentals, repair deteriorated units that would have become uninhabitable, build accessory dwelling units, or convert a garage or a basement into an apartment.
[36] For additional discussion of these factors and the capacity of rental markets to absorb vouchers, see Will Fischer, "Can Rental Markets Absorb a Major Voucher Expansion?" Cityscape, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2024, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/cityscape/vol26num2/article13.html.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/addressing-the-housing-affordability-crisis-requires-increasing-housing-supply-and
[Category: ThinkTank]
Capital Research Center Posts Commentary: Robert L. Woodson, Sr., and His Belief That Human Dignity and Moral Possibility Exist Everywhere
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Daniel P. Schmidt, former vice president for program of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, to the Giving Review:* * *
Robert L. Woodson, Sr., and his belief that human dignity and moral possibility exist everywhere
Serious purpose mixed with grace, good nature, fellowship, and maybe a little Marvin Gaye. Basic, common, connection-making humanity.
-
Like so many others over the years, those of us at Milwaukee's Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation learned a great deal from Bob Woodson, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Capital Research Center issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Daniel P. Schmidt, former vice president for program of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, to the Giving Review: * * * Robert L. Woodson, Sr., and his belief that human dignity and moral possibility exist everywhere Serious purpose mixed with grace, good nature, fellowship, and maybe a little Marvin Gaye. Basic, common, connection-making humanity. - Like so many others over the years, those of us at Milwaukee's Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation learned a great deal from Bob Woodson,who died last week. He was a good man who gave the best of himself, always, for and with others.
Among the many interactions Bradley had with Bob, founder of what became the Woodson Center, one experience in particular remains unforgettable to me. In 2003, Bob, several of his closest associates, and a small group connected to Bradley traveled to Russia to visit a number of civic and neighborhood organizations there. Organized by Declan Murphy, it was quite a trip. Declan is a former executive assistant to Librarian of Congress Jim Billington and advised Jack and Pina Templeton, including when the Templeton Prize was awarded in 1983 to Alexandr Solzhenitsyn.
One episode from the trip especially stays with me. We spent part of a day in a prison in St. Petersburg, meeting with four gang members--a tough and hardened group of Russian young men in a world far removed from our own. Watching Bob lead that conversation was eye-opening.
He spoke with them directly, naturally, and respectfully. There was no pretense about him. He understood instinctively how to engage people whom most institutions, and most people, would rather avoid altogether. Before long, what could have been a tense and uncomfortable encounter became a serious and searching discussion.
It was classic Bob Woodson. He believed deeply that human dignity and moral possibility existed everywhere, even in places where others saw only disorder, danger, or failure. He had spent his life proving it.
The trip was part of Bradley's highly Woodson-informed grantmaking interest in civil society, including nationally and internationally. My Bradley colleague and now Giving Review co-editor Bill Schambra references this interest in his call, including at the 2024 National Conservatism conference, for any conservative creation of a "parallel polis" to be sure and look for the one that already latently exists in America's central-city neighborhoods.
There were lighter moments on the Russia trip, too. One evening, during a concert at the historic hotel across from the Hermitage Museum, Omar Jahwar--one of Bob's longtime colleagues and many collaborators--asked Declan to request in Russian that the bandleader give him some B flat and C major chords, the classic blues chords, to get started. Omar then played the piano and sang some Marvin Gaye songs.
Years later, Omar became a bishop and continued serving his community in Dallas with the same spirit of that trip--as he did in founding, with support from Stand Together, both Urban Specialists in Dallas and the Heal America national network of social entrepreneurs. Omar died in 2021.
His performance was an extraordinary and joyful moment, and somehow perfectly fitting for that group, for the trip, and for Bob himself: serious purpose mixed with grace, good nature, fellowship, and maybe a little Marvin Gaye. Basic, common, connection-making humanity.
In honor of Bob and in his memory, let us all continue in that same spirit. Always, for and with others.
* * *
Daniel P. Schmidt retired as the vice president for program of The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation in Milwaukee in 2017.
* * *
Original text here: https://capitalresearch.org/article/robert-l-woodson-sr-and-his-belief-that-human-dignity-and-moral-possibility-exist-everywhere/
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues States Weekly News Wrap Up on June 10, 2026
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following States Weekly news wrap up on June 10, 2026, by Aryan D'Rozario, associate fellow for the Chair on India and Emerging Asia Economics:* * *
Big News: Andhra Pradesh approves a State Aviation Policy 2026-31; Bihar approves the Bihar Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) (Repeal) Ordinance, 2026; Haryana amends the Haryana Building Code 2017; West Bengal approves Annapurna Bhandar Scheme; Nagaland mandates 4-stream waste segregation in urban areas; and more.
Health
Nagaland ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following States Weekly news wrap up on June 10, 2026, by Aryan D'Rozario, associate fellow for the Chair on India and Emerging Asia Economics: * * * Big News: Andhra Pradesh approves a State Aviation Policy 2026-31; Bihar approves the Bihar Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) (Repeal) Ordinance, 2026; Haryana amends the Haryana Building Code 2017; West Bengal approves Annapurna Bhandar Scheme; Nagaland mandates 4-stream waste segregation in urban areas; and more. Health Nagalandimposes a one-year statewide ban on smokeless tobacco. The order bans the manufacture, storage, distribution, transportation, and sale of all food products containing tobacco or nicotine.
Source: Nagaland Tribune
Punjab expands the 'Mukh Mantri Sehat Yojana' (Chief Minister's Health Scheme). The scheme now extends cashless health insurance coverage to people living alone, including senior citizens, and widows, while also allowing 17 additional medical procedures to be carried out at designated private hospitals.
Source: News 18
Himachal Pradesh increases coverage under the Chief Miniter's Himachal Health Care Scheme (HimCare Scheme). Coverage will increase from $7,338 (INR 7 lakh) to $10,483 (INR 10 lakh) per family.
Source: Devdiscourse
Climate Change and Energy
Gujarat approves GERC (Grid Interactive Distributed Renewable Energy Sources) Regulations, 2026. The regulations issued by the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) propose to create a broader framework covering multiple metering mechanisms while integrating battery storage provisions.
Source: Saur Energy
In detail: GERC (Grid Interactive Distributed Renewable Energy Sources) Regulations, 2026
Karnataka issues draft KERC Grid Interactive Distributed Solar Photovoltaic (DSPV) Plants Regulations, 2026. The proposal, issued by the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC), replaces 2016 rooftop solar regulations and introduces net metering, net billing, gross metering, group net metering, virtual net metering and behind-the-meter mechanisms.
Source: Solar Bytes
In detail: Draft Grid Interactive Distributed Solar Photovoltaic (DSPV) Plants Regulations, 2026
Karnataka issues the KERC (Transmission License) Regulations, 2026. The regulations, issued by Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC), deploy a Tariff-Based Competitive Bidding (TBCB) modality for intra-state transmission infrastructure.
Source: Vyqon
In detail: Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission (Transmission Licence) Regulations, 2026
Tamil Nadu issues TNERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Conventional Generation Tariff) Regulations, 2026. The regulations, issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (TNERC) will be applicable to all new grid-connected renewable energy projects commissioned during this period.
Source: Energy Dive
In detail: Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Conventional Generation Tariff) Regulations, 2026
Punjab issues PSERC (Electricity Supply Code, Standards of Performance and Related Matters) (3rd Amendment) Regulations, 2026. The regulations, issued by the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (PSERC), introduce a structured approach for calculating electricity demand based on the size and type of development.
Source: Solar Quarter
Finance
Nothing critical to report this week.
Industrial Policy and Business Regulations
Andhra Pradesh approves a State Aviation Policy 2026-31. The policy aims to transform Andhra Pradesh into a major aviation and aerospace hub by increasing the passenger handling capacity and boosting air cargo volumes. The policy also envisages the development of 9 new airports.
Source:The Hindu
Bihar approves the Bihar Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) (Repeal) Ordinance, 2026. The policy aims to simplify labor laws, eliminate regulatory overlaps, and create a more business-friendly environment.
Source: SCC Online
In detail: Bihar Shops and Establishments (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) (Repeal) Ordinance, 2026
Haryana launches the Make in Haryana Industrial Policy 2026 and the Haryana Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming, Comics, and Extended Reality (AVGC-XR) Policy 2026. The policies, released together, aim to develop Haryana as one of India's future-ready destinations for investment, innovation, entrepreneurship, and talent development in the AVGC-XR ecosystem.
Source: The Print
In detail: Make in Haryana Industrial Policy 2026, Haryana AVGC-XR Policy 2026
Mizoram introduces a verification process for issuing a Red Card. The Red Card permit allows individuals to possess and consume liquor on medical grounds, since Mizoram is a dry state.
Source: India Today
In detail: Mizoram Red Card
Puducherry issues new guidelines for the approval and registration of bed and breakfast homestays. Establishments can be self-certified and graded into four categories: silver, gold, gold plus, and platinum, based on facilities and services.
Source: The Hindu
Land Acquisition and Labor Regulations
Haryana amends the Haryana Building Code 2017. The amendments ensure that Electric Vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure is mandatory in both residential and non-residential buildings.
Source: The Tribune
In detail: Notification; Town and Country Planning (17th Amendment) Rules, 2026
Haryana amends Change of Land Use (CLU) clearance policies. The new policy slashes required documents from 19 to only 3. Additionally, auto-renewal options have been rolled out for eligible industries, easing both compliance costs and procedural hold-ups.
Source: Swarajya
Telangana bans cash payments to laborers and workers. Electronic transfers will now be mandatory.
Source: Business Standard
In detail: Telangana Wages Notification
Infrastructure and Governance
Madhya Pradesh approves the Swamitva Rights Record Execution and Registration Scheme 2026. The new scheme waives stamp duty and registration fees on property rights records issued under Swamitva, whose mission is to provide a "record of rights" and issue property cards to owners of rural houses in rural populated areas.
Source: Millennium post
Maharashtra issues Government Resolution (GR) to extend the benefits of several welfare and education schemes available to Other Backward Classes (OBCs) to the Maratha community. As per the order, the Post-Matric Scholarship Scheme available to OBC students will now be extended to Maratha students as will scholarships in primary, secondary and higher secondary institutions. Further, Maratha students will be eligible for all educational concessions and facilities available to OBC students across various courses.
Source: Hindustan Times
In detail: Government Notification (in Marathi)
Maharashtra approves 'Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Shetkari Karja Mukti Yojana' (Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Farmers' Debt Waiver Scheme). The scheme provides farm loan waivers of up to $2,096 (INR 2 lakh) and introduces incentive benefits for those farmers who have repaid their loans on time.
Source: NDTV
In detail: Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Shetkari Karja Mukti Yojana (in Marathi)
West Bengal approves Annapurna Bhandar Scheme. The scheme provides $31.45 (INR 3000) per month to women from economically weaker sections of society between the ages of 25 and 60.
Source: The Hindu
In detail: Notification
Assam approves a 2 percent increase in Dearness Allowance (DA) and Dearness Relief (DR). The enhanced rates will apply to serving government employees and pensioners.
Source: NDTV
Himachal Pradesh approves the Regularization Policy 2026. The policy legalizes encroachments by eligible landless families and marginal farmers on government land.
Source: Devdiscourse
Himachal Pradesh mandates that 25 percent of the revenue generated under the Green Panchayat Scheme will be utilized for the welfare of orphans and widows. The Green Panchayat Scheme sets up solar power projects on waste and/or barren government land
Source: The News Himachal
Punjab amends its Kisan Credit Card (KCC) Policy. The new policy aims to substantially increase crop loan limits, introduce credit facilities for alternative crops, and ban private banks from seizing farmers' lands or publicly shaming defaulters.
Source: The Statesman
Water and Sanitation
Nagaland mandates 4-stream waste segregation in urban areas. The policy requires households, businesses, institutions, and public establishments to separate waste into 4 designated categories.
Source: Borok Times
Center - State Relations
Nothing critical to report this week.
Any Other
Haryana revises its policy governing postgraduate medical education for in-service doctors, eliminating the mandatory medical education bond requirement for those pursuing clinical specialties. Under the revised policy, doctors who obtain postgraduate degrees in clinical disciplines while in government service will no longer be obligated to serve in medical education institutions under the Department of Medical Education and Research (DMER).
Source: Tribune
* * *
Aryan D'Rozario is an associate fellow for the Chair on India and Emerging Asia Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/states-weekly-newsletter-june-10-2026
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Commentary: Who Should Shape the Future of Development, and How?
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Andrew Friedman, director and senior fellow in the Human Rights Initiative, and Hadeil Ali, chief of staff of the Global Development Department:* * *
Who Should Shape the Future of Development, and How?
Introduction
The last few years have seen unprecedented disruption in the world of international development. At the top of the list is the Trump administration's dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and cancellation of development grants, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Andrew Friedman, director and senior fellow in the Human Rights Initiative, and Hadeil Ali, chief of staff of the Global Development Department: * * * Who Should Shape the Future of Development, and How? Introduction The last few years have seen unprecedented disruption in the world of international development. At the top of the list is the Trump administration's dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and cancellation of development grants,but these actions are part of a broader pattern. The majority of countries with foreign assistance budgets across the globe have reduced official development assistance (ODA). While these decisions have been particularly impactful and have spawned conversations about the future of development and foreign assistance, the reality is that many of these conversations have been ongoing for decades.
Discussions of decisionmaking, incentives, stakeholders, inefficiencies, and constituencies--ultimately, conversations about power--have long been front of mind for practitioners of international development and those most impacted by its efforts. While the upheaval since January 2025 has damaged trust and relationships and caused preventable death and conflict, there now exists a possibility to reimagine international development and make changes that were difficult, perhaps even impossible, just a few years ago.
That these conversations are not new does not diminish their necessity, their timeliness, or their difficulty. A true shift of power in decisionmaking and priority setting requires the buy-in and action of stakeholders, the creativity and pragmatism of individuals, and the political will and courage of leaders. This analysis focuses on three stakeholder groups who will play an outsized role in the future of development: civil society, philanthropy, and the private sector. All three groups were part of a series of roundtables held under the Chatham House rule at CSIS from September 2025 through March 2026. The authors propose a list of recommendations for each group below. Each recommendation is necessary to challenge and shift the power dynamic between donors and impacted community, ultimately ensuring greater sustainability, efficiency, and impact of development efforts.
Two throughlines have emerged connecting the recommendations for each group:
1. Do not forget the lessons and structures that already exist. Previous work on international development has provided many lessons about what works and what does not, and these should not be forgotten. Additionally, both through previous work and through independent state building and development, many robust structures already exist. Building structures that run in parallel to functional ones is inefficient, unsustainable, and ensures that structural power imbalances endure.
2. Without coordination, efforts are destined to be piecemeal and lack efficiency. A recurring message from the roundtables held at CSIS was the sheer number of ongoing high-level "future of development" and "future of foreign assistance" conversations. One participant, whose organization had conducted a mapping exercise of civil society-led initiatives, counted 39 such efforts. Another participant from the philanthropy sector put the number at 70. The level of expertise and thought on what the future will look like is undoubtedly a boon and could lead to impressive innovation and a true reimagining. However, if such efforts are not coordinated, they are destined to be repetitive, inefficient, and occasionally at cross-purposes.
Philanthropy
Foundations and other philanthropic organizations play a key role in the future of development that has greater needs and less ODA. However, even a fully aligned and coordinated philanthropy sector cannot fill the gap left by governments. According to estimates from the Organisation of Economic Co-Ordination and Development, global ODA dropped by $56 billion over two years (2023-2025). By contrast, the entirety of private philanthropic giving in the international development sphere is approximately $17 billion annually. This creates a difficult strategic calculus, where the need is immediate and great, but the necessity of being strategic and pointed is unending.
Theme 1: Role Clarity
* Be clear about philanthropy's role as an enabler and catalyst, giving civil society the space to lead the design of the reimagined development landscape.
* Leverage the ability to be nimble, fast, and take risks that governments and multilateral institutions cannot to enable strategic funding and decisionmaking.
* Build accountability measures to ensure the goals outlined are not only theoretical or aspirational.
* Support learning efforts to break siloes, facilitate learnings, and act as a helpful knowledge production tool.
Theme 2: Funding Structure
* Evolve funding systems from project-based grants to unrestricted multiyear funding in order to alleviate the administrative burden on local organizations.
* Further expand participatory grantmaking, placing impacted communities at the center of the process and rebalancing the decisionmaking equation.
* Invest in more pooled funds for more strategic, impactful, and effective investments.
* Expand funding to support Global South networks and coalitions to invest in institutional capacity.
Theme 3: Localization
While this is not a new conversation in the philanthropic and broader development ecosystem, this moment has presented a renewed interest and opportunity to intentionally prioritize this issue.
* Address challenges around power dynamics, inclusion, and equity. Organizations' own internal structures and operating models are key starting points to ensure these concepts are internalized.
* Act as an institutional bridge between Global North and Global South countries to form equitable partnerships
* Examine preconceived notions of "partners" to ensure civil society actors are viewed as experts, and not merely beneficiaries or implementers.
* Recognize the existing local initiatives and solutions at play and find ways to amplify and support these efforts.
* There is an immense trust gap in the current development landscape, and philanthropy should determine its role in rebuilding that trust with existing and future partners.
Civil Society
Perhaps no sector has borne the brunt of cuts and attacks more than civil society. According to the Global Aid Freeze Tracker, which has had four rounds of surveys since February 2025, more than 70 percent of civil society organizations responded that they had to lay off some staff, with nearly 40 percent responding that they had to lay off 31 percent or more. The surveys have also demonstrated decreasing confidence in survival, with an ever-greater number of organizations reporting they are at risk of closure. Despite this context, civil society seeks to continue its vital work providing healthcare and education and advocating for greater transparency and accountability, along with countless other functions across the globe.
Theme 1: Positioning
* Establish a foundational infrastructure that enables the key development prerequisites for a healthy, stable, and prosperous society. Philanthropy, private sector, and other actors must leverage and support civil society and overall local expertise to enable the most durable outcomes.
* Be realistic and honest about the current rapidly evolving political and financial environment to ensure proactive adaptation of approaches, strategies, and partnerships.
* Anchor efforts with three key steps: (1) define the root problem, (2) assess whether preexisting solutions are in place, and (3) identify what systemic barriers are preventing the solutions from working.
* Highlight successful partnerships through storytelling and quantitative data.
* Strengthen community engagement and accountability measures given the massive trust gap in the sector.
Theme 2: Resource Diversification
* Move beyond traditional aid and find innovating fundraising solutions to survive the current environment
* Frame the work as social profit that advances system-level solutions. In a moment where messaging is key, such a framing would help diversify resources and ensure a focus on long-term resilience
The Private Sector
While companies have always contributed to development, intentional efforts to partner with local groups and nurture development outside of regular business operations have seldom been a significant focus area. The closure of USAID, reduced ODA, and diminished government capabilities in the international development sector from both the U.S. government and other traditional donors has led to substantial gaps between what the private sector needs continue its work and what is actually being done. Thankfully, multiple models exist for ramping up support for civil society through both the provision of resources and other means.
Theme 1: Understand the "What"
* Align goals in the development space with corporate goals. This can include geographic considerations as well as substantive ones.
* Develop an understanding of systems and trusted stakeholders that are working or have worked toward these goals.
Theme 2: Determine the "How"
* Work with embedded organizations to develop a model that allows for full independence, thus utilizing trust and relationships without causing them damage.
* Develop both internal and external messaging that reinforces and improves understanding of the value of the work with diverse partners and stakeholders.
Theme 3: Delineate Support Versus Public Relations
* Work with trusted interlocutors to necessarily limit control over funds as well as actions of organizations receiving support. Understand it is the role of civil society to push for improvements, and that can involve criticism of action and of companies providing funding.
* Understand the ecosystem well enough to be responsive to civil society and to be solution-oriented, while seeing the difference between broad, community-wide suggestions and less constructive or less widely held considerations.
Conclusion
The above recommendations are not meant to be comprehensive, nor are they meant to exist in a vacuum. While they are organized by stakeholder group, none stand alone, and each group has a role to play in ensuring that the other stakeholders are held accountable. Other groups, including multilateral organizations and governments, will undoubtedly also play significant roles in the future of development should also focus on improving efficiency, sustainability, and the benefit to impacted populations. Without all groups in alignment and ensuring that development is locally owned and informed, development's impact will remain diminished.
* * *
This analysis is Part III of a three-part series covering the need and urgency to center rightsholders in the future of U.S. foreign assistance. In a moment of tremendous flux, these commentaries offer analysis and recommendations for a new model rooted in local consultation and input from those most impacted by foreign assistance. Read Part I (https://www.csis.org/analysis/why-losing-local-voices-foreign-aid-diplomacy-mergers-threatens-national-security) here and Part II here (https://www.csis.org/analysis/shifting-power-next-phase-us-foreign-assistance).
* * *
Andrew Friedman is director and senior fellow in the Human Rights Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. Hadeil Ali is chief of staff of the Global Development Department at CSIS.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/who-should-shape-future-development-and-how
[Category: ThinkTank]
CSIS Issues Commentary: 2026 World Cup - Sports and Conflict
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Victor Cha, president of the Geopolitics and Foreign Policy Department, and Andy Lim, deputy director and fellow with the CSIS Korea Chair:* * *
The 2026 World Cup: Sports and Conflict
The world will come together for the World Cup in North America starting this week. To what extent can the gathering of athletes, the spirit of competition, and the goodwill created by sport provide opportunities for diplomacy in a world disrupted by war? Mega sporting events like the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The Center for Strategic and International Studies issued the following commentary on June 10, 2026, by Victor Cha, president of the Geopolitics and Foreign Policy Department, and Andy Lim, deputy director and fellow with the CSIS Korea Chair: * * * The 2026 World Cup: Sports and Conflict The world will come together for the World Cup in North America starting this week. To what extent can the gathering of athletes, the spirit of competition, and the goodwill created by sport provide opportunities for diplomacy in a world disrupted by war? Mega sporting events like theWorld Cup and the Olympics are intimately tied to global affairs as athletes compete against each other, adorned in the national colors of their country.
The spirit of global sporting events mandates, in ideal circumstances, that countries put aside their extant conflicts for the moment of competition on the field. In some cases, sport can act as an unconventional form of diplomacy, opening doors to dialogue in a way that no diplomatic demarche could accomplish. In the early 1970s, "ping-pong diplomacy"--spurred by the impromptu visit to China by the U.S. amateur table tennis team competing in the world championships in Japan--helped pave the way to the opening of relations between America and communist China. Sport can also act as a prism through which international conflict is refracted. Sport and geopolitical conflict arguably reached its apex during the Cold War with the decision, ironically, not to compete. In 1980, the Carter administration boycotted the Moscow Olympics over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Soviet Union reciprocated in 1984 by refusing to compete in the Summer Olympics hosted in Los Angeles.
Given these precedents, what are the chances that sports diplomacy on the soccer pitch in 2026 can create diplomatic opportunities or even peace breakthroughs? As the United States prepares to co-host the largest World Cup ever played, with 48 nations represented, the link between sports and politics is no less relevant than it was during the Cold War. While armed conflicts, territorial disputes, economic disagreements, and diplomatic disputes exist among the competing countries, the notion that international sport is, in George Orwell's phrase, "war minus the shooting," is far from validated.
Conflict on the Pitch?
Figure 1 shows the potential pairings of countries involved in extant conflicts--classified as armed conflict, severed relations, territorial disputes, and divided nations--at World Cup tournaments from 1930 to 2026.
* * *
Figure 1: Every Adversarial Meeting During World Cups Since 1930
* * *
The first observation is that it is rare for adversaries to compete in the same tournament. Across 23 World Cups, the percent of potential team pairings that involve adversaries in an active conflict has never topped 1.1 percent. The proportion of potential adversarial matchups was highest in the 1982 World Cup, which took place during the Falklands War.
The luck of the draw has brought protagonists into direct competition only four times in World Cup history, and the results are memorably infused with political symbols even if diplomatic breakthroughs go unachieved. The match between East and West Germany at the 1974 World Cup would be the only time the two Germanies would square off against one another before unification with East Germany, resulting in one of the biggest upsets in World Cup history. The 1986 match between Argentina and England became the prism through which both sides remembered the Falklands War and sparked an intense rivalry thereafter. The 1998 World Cup match provided a brief moment of goodwill in an otherwise antagonistic U.S.-Iran relationship. The two teams broke with protocol to take a combined team picture, and the U.S. team received white roses from the Iranian team, a Persian symbol of peace. The 2022 World Cup match between the United States and Iran became the stage for a show of resistance against Tehran when members of the Iranian national team refused to sing the country's national anthem, in support of anti-regime protestors at home.
Today, even with wars in Europe and the Middle East underway, the 2026 World Cup, co-hosted by the United States, remains a low-conflict field, with active adversaries making up 0.35 percent of the 48-team field. All four adversarial pairs in this year's tournament landed in different groups, so none can meet before the knockout rounds, and most likely never will. Iran and the United States are actively at war today but are not likely to face one another at the tournament, though a meeting in the knockout rounds is not impossible. Even before the games kick off on June 11, however, politics can still rear its head--the Iran soccer federation complained that FIFA had pulled its fan-ticket allocation for its three U.S. matches and that Washington had rescinded visas for some of its officials.
By raw count, 2026 has more adversary pairs, four, than any World Cup before it. But according to our data, even as the World Cup has grown in size from 13 teams to 48, larger and larger tournaments have not meant proportionally more adversary pairs; the share of adversarial matchups has held flat at roughly 0.3 percent, well below the 1982 peak. This says more about who qualifies than it does about the world: Teams reach the World Cup on footballing strength. The surprise is not that the world has grown calmer, because it has not, but that the World Cup field so rarely reflects the conflicts.
What this data does not account for is the use of sport sanctions, usually in the form of competition bans, that reduce the number of adversarial matchups on the field. In the 1956 Melbourne Olympics, the Soviet Union and Hungary clashed in the men's semifinal in water polo, famously termed the "blood in the water match," which occurred just weeks after the Soviet invasion of Hungary. The dominant potential for peaceful matchups on the football pitch has been driven by the banning of revisionist actors from competition, for example, the Soviet Union in 1974, Yugoslavia in 1994, and Russia in 2026.
Figure 2 shows the adversary matrix for the 2026 World Cup, including all 48 teams. The field holds only four potential adversary pairs: Iran v. United States, Iran v. Saudi Arabia, Iran v. Qatar, and Morocco v. Algeria, or 0.35 percent of all possible pairings, still well below the 1982 peak of 1.09 percent.
* * *
Figure 2: Adversarial Matchups at the 2026 World Cup
* * *
What Is the Likelihood the World Cup Can Create a Diplomatic Breakthrough?
While the World Cup is bound to captivate a global audience, create memorable moments, and produce some goodwill, it is unlikely to pave a path to peace absent additional factors. Even in the famous case of ping-pong diplomacy, U.S.-China rapprochement would not have been possible without the substantive secret talks between the Nixon administration and its Chinese interlocutors seeking a diplomatic breakthrough. Ping-pong diplomacy, and the positive reaction among the U.S. public, accelerated Nixon's diplomatic efforts with China, as sports helped illustrate that the American electorate would likely have a positive response. Meanwhile, U.S.-Iran wrestling exhibitions have created temporary goodwill but have fallen short of resolving long-standing political tensions.
In the end, sport can help to facilitate a peace breakthrough only if quiet diplomacy is already underway and if there is political will by relevant leaders. Absent substantive efforts from both sides, political leaders are unlikely to find the golden-goal diplomatic breakthrough thanks to a soccer match.
This study's methodology is available here (https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2026-06/260610_Cha_Sports_Methodology.pdf?VersionId=XdRdpfi_coJ7W.tIl_3ETod60pEm_293)
* * *
Victor Cha is president of the Geopolitics and Foreign Policy Department and Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., professor of government at Georgetown University and author of Beyond the Final Score: The Politics of Sport in Asia (Columbia, 2011) and "A Theory of Sports and Politics" (2009). Andy Lim is deputy director and fellow with the Korea Chair at CSIS.
The authors appreciate Phillip Meylan's and William Taylor's work in publishing this commentary.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.csis.org/analysis/2026-world-cup-sports-and-conflict
[Category: ThinkTank]
American Action Forum: What Happens When the Social Security Retirement Fund Goes Bankrupt?
WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The American Action Forum issued the following research on June 10, 2026, by Fiscal Policy Director Jordan Haring:* * *
What Happens When the Social Security Retirement Fund Goes Bankrupt?
Executive Summary
* In their 2026 report, the Social Security Trustees estimate the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund will exhaust its reserves and become insolvent by the end of calendar year 2032; upon insolvency, all beneficiaries regardless of age, income, or need will see their benefits slashed by 22 percent.
* The magnitude of the 22 percent across-the-board ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 11 -- The American Action Forum issued the following research on June 10, 2026, by Fiscal Policy Director Jordan Haring: * * * What Happens When the Social Security Retirement Fund Goes Bankrupt? Executive Summary * In their 2026 report, the Social Security Trustees estimate the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund will exhaust its reserves and become insolvent by the end of calendar year 2032; upon insolvency, all beneficiaries regardless of age, income, or need will see their benefits slashed by 22 percent. * The magnitude of the 22 percent across-the-boardbenefit cut will vary across different types of retirees and for retirees across the income spectrum: a newly retired single, middle-income retiree would see an annual benefit cut of $8,100, a single-income, middle-income couple would see a $12,200 reduction, and a dual-income, middle-income couple would see their benefits slashed by $16,200.
* Lawmakers' pledge to "not touch" Social Security is not a promise to protect benefits, but an implicit endorsement of a 22 percent across-the-board benefit cut in just six years.
-
Introduction
In their 2026 report, the Social Security Trustees estimate the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund - which currently pays monthly benefits to over 63 million retired workers, their spouses and children, and their survivors - is projected to exhaust its reserves and become insolvent by the end of calendar year (CY) 2032. That means the OASI trust fund will run out when today's 61-year-olds reach the normal retirement age of 67 and today's youngest retirees - those retiring at age 62 - turn 68.
Under the law, the OASI trust fund does not have borrowing authority, so upon insolvency it will be unable to borrow from the Treasury to close the gap between dedicated revenue and spending and continue to pay benefits in full. The Social Security Trustees estimate that in CY 2032, the OASI trust fund will have enough dedicated revenue to pay 78 percent of scheduled benefits. That means all OASI beneficiaries regardless of age, income, or need will see their benefits slashed by 22 percent across the board.
Measuring the Magnitude of a 22-percent Benefit Cut
The magnitude of the 22-percent cut in annual Social Security benefits varies for different types of retirees and for retirees across the income spectrum.
A single, low-income worker retiring at the normal retirement age in CY 2032 would see an annual benefit cut of $4,900[1]. Whereas the beneficiary would receive $22,300 in annual benefits under a solvent Social Security system, she would receive only $17,400 once the OASI trust fund becomes insolvent and the 22-percent benefit cut takes effect. A single, middle-income retiree would face a $7,400 cut, which would reduce his annual benefits from $36,800 to $28,700. A single, high-income retiree would see her benefits slashed by $10,700, from $48,600 to $37,900.
For couples, a typical single-income, low-income couple would see their annual Social Security benefits cut by $7,400, meaning their annual benefits would decline from $33,400 to $26,100. A single-income, middle-income couple would face a $12,200 cut, which would reduce their benefits from $55,200 to $43,100. A single-income, high-income couple would see their benefits slashed by $16,000, from $72,900 to $56,900.
A typical dual-income, low-income couple would see their annual benefits cut by $9,900, meaning their benefits would fall from $44,600 to $34,800. A dual-income, middle-income couple would face a $16,200 cut, which would decrease their benefits from $73,600 to $57,400. A dual-income, high-income couple would see their benefits reduced by $21,400, from $97,200 to $75,800.
* * *
Chart: Magnitude of 22-percent OASI Benefit Cut for Different Types of Retirees
* * *
Conclusion
Lawmakers have pledged not to touch Social Security, often declaring it "off the table" for reform. While this pledge is framed as a promise to protect benefits, it is an implicit endorsement of a 22 percent across-the-board benefit cut for nearly 71 million beneficiaries when Social Security's retirement fund runs out in just six years. Action should be taken soon to make Social Security solvent and prevent abrupt benefit cuts.
[1] All figures are in 2032 dollars and are rounded to the nearest $100.
* * *
Jordan Haring is the Director of Fiscal Policy at the American Action Forum
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/what-happens-when-the-social-security-retirement-fund-goes-bankrupt/
[Category: ThinkTank]