Resource context
This academic paper, “Beyond collective property: a typology of collaborative housing in Europe”, is published in the International Journal of Housing Policy and authored by Emma Jo Griffith, Mirte Jepma, and Federico Savini (University of Amsterdam). It examines collaborative housing as an alternative to conventional private/public tenure models and develops a structured way to compare initiatives across Europe.
Scope and evidence base
The study reviews 100 collaborative housing cases across multiple European contexts, including Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Austria, the Netherlands, and Germany. Evidence is drawn from a content analysis of project websites and social media, interviews with 10 sector experts, and an in-depth case study of the 4Stelle Hotel in Rome, combining broad mapping with targeted qualitative insight.
Typology framework (three dimensions)
The authors propose a typology built on three analytical dimensions: (1) architecture (size and spatial configuration, especially shared spaces), (2) institutional setup (legal status and the distribution of property rights), and (3) organisation (governance, management approach, and value orientation). This framework is designed to classify projects consistently and enable cross-country comparison.
Architectural patterns and sharing regimes
Cases span a wide range of scales—from small groups with fewer than 10 members to extra-large communities with more than 100 residents. Two main “sharing regimes” are identified: projects that share mainly “extra” spaces (for example gardens or parking) and projects that share both functional and essential domestic spaces (such as kitchens and laundry facilities). These spatial choices help distinguish different models of communal living and resource use relevant to sustainability and everyday practices.
Institutional arrangements (law, rights, management)
The paper differentiates initiatives operating within formal legal frameworks from those in trans-legal situations. It also distinguishes between dispersed property-rights arrangements (spread across several entities) and more concentrated ownership or control within a single collective. Management models range from self-managed initiatives led by residents to professionally managed arrangements, indicating that collaborative housing can be organised with varying degrees of formalisation and external support.
Organisational values and orientations
Across the cases, five main value orientations are identified: eco-communitarian goals, intergenerational collaboration, identity-based motivations, affordability-focused initiatives, and service provision. These orientations describe the social purposes and commitments shaping collaborative housing, from environmental aims and mutual support to inclusion and cost-related goals.
Contribution for sustainable housing debates in Europe
By demonstrating that collaborative housing succeeds in many configurations (different scales, legal forms, and governance models), the study challenges simplified assumptions that a single “best” model exists. The typology provides a comparative tool for researchers and policymakers to analyse how architectural design, institutional settings, and organisational values combine in real projects, supporting more nuanced evaluation of collaborative housing as part of Europe’s sustainable and socially oriented housing landscape.