Homeoffice und die Zukunft der Büros: Flexibilisierung, Reduzierung und Umnutzungspotenzial

This resource, “Homeoffice und die Zukunft der Büros: Flexibilisierung, Reduzierung und Umnutzungspotenzial”, is published in ifo Schnelldienst by Simon Krause (ifo Institut) together with Andreas Trumpp, Tobias Dichtl, Susanne Kiese, and Alexander Rutsch (Colliers International Deutschland GmbH). It compiles survey evidence and market analysis on how remote and hybrid work are reshaping office demand, office typologies, vacancy dynamics, and the practical potential to repurpose redundant office space—especially into housing.

The study documents that working from home has persisted beyond the pandemic and has become “the new normal” for a substantial share of the workforce and employers. It combines multiple data sources to describe the German home-office trend (Eurostat for 2012–2019; infas360 for 2020–2021; and ifo Institute surveys for 2021–2023) and reports a post‑spring‑2022 stabilisation of the home-office share at just under 25%, with an ifo survey value of 23.4% in August 2024. In company intentions, 74% of organisations where home office is possible plan to keep it in its current form, while 12% plan stricter return-to-office rules and 4% plan to abolish home office entirely.

Building on earlier modelling, the authors reiterate a long-run decline in office-space demand of around 12% as firms adapt their work environments. Because lease contracts are typically long, adjustments arrive with delay; survey results in August 2024 show that 6.2% of firms have already reduced office space and a further 8.3% plan reductions within five years. The effects are strongest among large service firms (≥ €25m annual revenue), which account for a large share of office usage. Alongside downsizing, office functions are described as shifting from individual desk work toward collaboration, exchange, mentoring, and organisational identification.

For large office users, desk sharing is a prominent response: 28.6% of large service firms report implemented or planned desk sharing (16.1% for the overall economy). The study illustrates the space-efficiency logic with an example: a desk ratio of 0.7 (desks per employee) implies a theoretical 30% space saving, though coordination of in‑office days can limit achievable reductions. Other adaptations include expanding meeting and social spaces (18.1% of large service firms; 8.8% overall). Quality upgrades are also emphasised: modernising/higher-quality fit‑out is reported by 29.2% of large service firms (17.8% overall), and improving IT infrastructure by 36.4% (24.9% overall). Location changes occur less frequently overall, but large service firms more often consider moves into modern buildings (9.3%) and, to a smaller extent, better-connected or more central, amenity-rich settings.

The report links falling demand, macroeconomic headwinds, and higher interest rates and construction costs with continued office construction, resulting in rising vacancy in Germany’s Top‑7 cities (Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Cologne, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Düsseldorf). It cites an increase in vacancy rates from about 3% (2019) to 6.7% currently, with an expectation of roughly 8% in coming years. Against the backdrop of high urban housing demand and rising rents, converting vacant offices to housing is presented as an intuitive option—but technically constrained. A referenced analysis estimates that only about 30% of vacant office space is technically and planning‑law suitable for conversion to residential use.

Using the 30% technical/planning suitability benchmark, the study estimates a medium-term repurposing potential of 5.8 million m² of office area across the Top‑7 cities, combining 2.3 million m² from current vacancy and 3.5 million m² expected from the home-office-driven demand decline. Assuming a 20% area loss during conversion and an average apartment size of 77 m², this yields a theoretical potential of up to ~60,200 apartments. With an assumed average household size of 1.7 people, this corresponds to housing for roughly 102,000 people. However, the authors stress that only a small share is likely to be economically viable: conversion depends on whether higher residential rents and/or valuation factors can cover conversion (CapEx) costs and provide an adequate developer margin. An illustrative case suggests feasibility at the lower edge when rental levels and valuation factors rise sufficiently, translating into a CapEx potential on the order of €2,400 per m².

Because most obsolete office buildings may not convert profitably into housing, the study highlights additional reuse pathways. It cites life-science conversions as suitable for an additional 3–4% of office space, with different location requirements than housing. It also points to education uses (schools, universities, training centres), potentially temporary, given growing student numbers and investment backlogs in major cities. In specific cases, state-driven demand could support uses such as refugee accommodation. For large-floorplate buildings where full conversion is difficult, partial reuse and mixed-use concepts are presented as ways to activate space and increase building attractiveness—e.g., ground-floor retail, local services, gastronomy, and other public-facing or community-oriented functions, while noting that such uses are strongly location- and context-dependent.

Overall, the study concludes that hybrid work reduces office demand structurally and increases obsolescence risks, while simultaneously creating a (limited) pipeline of space that could contribute to housing supply in high-demand cities. The central quantitative messages are the ~12% long-term demand decline, the ~30% technical/planning suitability threshold for residential conversion, and the Top‑7-city potential of 5.8 million m² translating to around 60,000 apartments—paired with the caution that economic feasibility remains the binding constraint for most projects.