Overview of the Research Brief
This briefing originates from The Guardian’s “Comment is Free” platform and is authored by three scholars: Tarik Abou‑Chadi, a professor of European Politics at the University of Oxford; Silja Häusermann, a professor at the Department of Political Science, University of Zurich; and Björn Bremer, an assistant professor at the Department of Political Science, Central European University in Vienna. The authors present findings from the Progressive Politics Research Network, aiming to translate social‑science research on Europe’s housing crisis for a broader audience.
Scale of the Housing Cost Burden
Across Europe, housing costs have outpaced income growth for the past decade. Property prices have risen faster than wages in many countries, while rents have surged exponentially in large cities and also increased substantially in suburban areas and smaller university towns. In nations such as Germany, Austria and Switzerland, more than half of the population lives in rented accommodation, highlighting the growing reliance on the private rental market.
Impact on Younger Households and Immigrants
Affordability pressures have pushed younger households toward renting as their primary tenure option. In Germany, demographic factors—especially age—correlate more strongly with housing inequality than income alone. Younger families and immigrant groups often face severe overcrowding, whereas older households increasingly occupy under‑used dwellings, creating a dual challenge of over‑ and under‑occupation.
Policy Paradigms: Asset vs. Social Right
The brief distinguishes two dominant policy frames. The “housing as an asset” model treats homes as investment vehicles, encouraging price growth and market‑driven policies. This paradigm has become prevalent even among left‑leaning parties, leading to reduced social housing stock, deregulated rentals, and new investment structures that elevate prices. Conversely, the “housing as a social right” approach emphasizes affordability, security and non‑speculative use, advocating for public responsibility in ensuring decent shelter for all.
Lessons from Vienna’s Broad‑Access Model
Vienna exemplifies a successful broad‑access system: roughly 40 % of households live in limited‑profit or public housing, coupled with strong rental protections. This inclusive model fosters cross‑class political support, reduces stigma, and demonstrates how wide‑scale social housing can coexist with market mechanisms while maintaining social cohesion.
Redistribution and Under‑Occupation Strategies
Beyond new construction, the authors argue that policy must address the redistribution of existing housing stock. In many European cities, vacant or under‑occupied units rival the scale of overcrowding. Incentives for reallocating surplus space—through tax measures, tenancy reforms or public‑private partnerships—could alleviate pressure without solely relying on building more homes.
Densification with Design and Participation
Increasing housing density is deemed inevitable, but success hinges on thoughtful design and community involvement. Surveys across Europe and the United States reveal that public acceptance of densification rises when projects incorporate participatory governance, protect local amenities, and ensure affordability. Poorly planned densification risks political backlash and fails to deliver social benefits.
Financing Through Wealth Taxes and Housing Funds
Substantial public investment is required to shift toward a rights‑based housing agenda. The brief suggests leveraging wealth‑to‑income ratios, wealth taxes, and reformed capital‑gains taxes, earmarking revenues for affordable housing. Austria’s experience shows that modest levies on limited‑profit providers, reinvested through dedicated housing funds, can sustain large‑scale provision.
Leveraging Private Capital with Conditions
Private investment can be directed toward social goals by attaching conditions to land‑use planning, construction regulations and public loans. Requirements may include profit reinvestment, cost‑based rents, limited‑profit constraints, and adherence to social and ecological standards, aligning market activity with public housing objectives.
Political Stakes: Far‑Right Exploitation of the Crisis
The briefing highlights that far‑right parties have capitalised on housing scarcity, framing it as a national‑only issue and blaming immigrants. This narrative gains traction as progressive parties focus on market solutions rather than comprehensive redistribution. The authors contend that a bold, inclusive housing agenda is essential to counteract this political dynamic.
Path Forward for Sustainable, Inclusive Housing
In summary, the authors call for a multi‑pronged strategy: reinvest in broad‑access social housing, promote redistribution of existing stock, ensure densification is socially and environmentally responsible, and fund these measures through progressive taxation and conditioned private investment. Such an approach aims to make European housing affordable, secure and non‑speculative, thereby reducing the appeal of far‑right populism and fostering sustainable, equitable communities.