Bosnia and Herzegovina

Bosnia and Herzegovina faces a persistent housing crisis fueled by high demand in urban areas, a limited supply of new housing, and significant construction bottlenecks. The country’s urban centers, especially Sarajevo, Banja Luka, and Mostar, experience the strongest pressure due to population shifts and economic activity. In 2024, just over 3,400 new dwellings were completed, with a similar number under construction, but labor shortages and high costs have slowed delivery. Administrative inefficiencies, such as slow permit approval, further delay expansion of the housing stock. The social impact of the crisis is multifaceted. Vulnerable groups affected include low-income families, many post-war refugees and displaced persons, young adults seeking independence, and ethnic minorities such as the Roma. The legacy of the 1990s conflicts left more than a million people displaced, with many still unable or unwilling to return to their original homes. Systematic discrimination, a dysfunctional housing market, and the expansion of informal settlements exacerbate the problem, leaving many faced with substandard conditions, housing insecurity, and a risk of homelessness. Housing affordability remains a challenge: while the average price-to-income ratio is comparable to other transition countries, the overall affordability index is less favorable, putting quality housing beyond the reach of many. Housing costs, including rising rents and utility prices, make up a significant share of household spending, straining budgets—especially for the poor and those without stable employment.

The national government of Bosnia and Herzegovina is addressing affordable and sustainable housing primarily through international partnerships and targeted reconstruction, rather than large-scale systematic reform or major national programmes. The most active policy tools involve energy efficiency upgrades and social housing initiatives for the most vulnerable. Recent targets focus on decarbonizing the residential sector—acknowledging that over 98% of homes were built before any energy efficiency rules, making energy use in residential buildings five times higher than comparable EU countries. The government aims to transform the sector to align with its Nationally Determined Contribution and National Climate Change Strategy. This involves financial incentives for energy-efficient renovations, support for green jobs, and the creation of funding systems for residential energy upgrades. The EU and United Nations support several concrete programmes. Notably, a €20 million EU-funded project supplies flood-affected areas with housing aid, infrastructure, and SME support, with ongoing public selection processes to ensure aid reaches the most in need. The government, with international partners, has launched or supported the construction and renovation of social housing buildings, prioritizing vulnerable groups, disaster victims, and young skilled workers. Smaller-scale projects like the Affordable Housing Initiative in Tuzla and renewable energy pilot schemes also contribute. However, these interventions remain project-based and dependent on international funding, with no evidence of a comprehensive, nationwide government-led affordable housing strategy.

Housing cooperatives in Bosnia and Herzegovina play a negligible role in the national housing sector. The overwhelming majority of residents—over 90 percent—are homeowners, a legacy of post-socialist privatizations, while both the rental and cooperative sectors remain small. There are no official statistics indicating any significant share of cooperative housing among the total housing units in the country, and the presence of housing cooperatives is largely absent from sectoral reports and policy documents. The sector has not seen notable development or expansion; cooperative housing as a model is neither widely recognized nor institutionally supported in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Instead, limited action in affordable and social housing is taken mainly through fragmented, project-based initiatives, driven by international organizations and donors. National government measures focus primarily on social housing for vulnerable groups and on energy efficiency upgrades in existing buildings, rather than fostering new cooperative housing. There is no evidence of specific government programs, incentives, or dedicated regulations aimed at promoting cooperative housing at the national level. In summary, cooperative housing does not currently constitute a meaningful part of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s housing market, and there are no state-driven policies or substantial sectoral dynamics suggesting significant future growth. The country’s affordable and non-profit housing developments remain project-based, with little structural support for the cooperative model.

The housing market in Bosnia and Herzegovina continues to experience strong demand, with prices and rents rising, notably in urban areas such as Sarajevo. Homeownership dominates, with estimates suggesting that over 90% of the population owns their home, reflecting the legacy of mass privatization after socialism. Renting remains limited, likely below 10% of households. In early 2025, the median price to buy a new apartment reached about 1,572 euros per square meter (3,073 BAM), a year-on-year increase of 10.7%. Rents also increased, with the average monthly rent for a studio in Sarajevo at approximately 230 euros. Airbnb rentals across the country vary, but typical monthly earnings for a median property are around 280 euros, indicating generally modest rents outside major city centers. Publicly owned housing, mainly social housing, plays a minor role. Recent initiatives foresee about 2,600 public and assisted housing units under development, serving roughly 7,200 vulnerable residents. Public housing is not synonymous with social housing in Bosnia and Herzegovina; while the terms can overlap, social housing specifically targets non-profit schemes and the vulnerable, whereas public housing may include broader state or municipally owned stock, some of which is managed privately due to past privatizations. Overall, public and social housing together account for only a small fraction of the housing stock, with significant unmet demand.