Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU

Context and Publication

The study “Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU” is a peer‑reviewed report published by the journal Buildings & Cities. It is authored by a multidisciplinary team including Matthias Lehner, Jessika Luth Richter, Halliki Kreinin, Pia Mamut, Edina Vadovics, Josefine Henman and several additional contributors. The research was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme and forms part of the EU 1.5° Lifestyles project, which examines low‑carbon lifestyle options across five EU member states (Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Spain and Sweden).

Scope and Methodology

The investigation focuses on “living smaller” – voluntarily reducing per‑capita dwelling space or sharing housing – as a strategy for housing sufficiency and climate mitigation. Data were collected through citizen and stakeholder thinking labs (CTLs and STLs) between September 2022 and February 2024. CTLs explored acceptance, motivations and lived experiences, while STLs examined structural barriers and policy levers. Over 200 participants contributed qualitative insights that were coded deductively using software‑assisted content analysis.

Acceptance and Barriers

Initial acceptance for downsizing was low: only 29 % of respondents expressed willingness to give up excess square metres, and 21 % were open to shared housing. Major obstacles identified were complex housing markets favouring ownership, privacy concerns, entrenched social norms valuing larger homes, and historical memories (e.g., forced sharing in Hungary).

Motivations for Smaller Living

When participants had already downsized, motivations fell into four categories:

• Value‑based: environmental ethics and perceived excess.
• Practical: changing family composition, desire for urban proximity, reduced maintenance.
• Economic: lower rent or mortgage costs, reduced utility bills.
• Structural: market pressures and limited housing options.

Effects – Positive and Negative

Negative impacts reported include reduced socialising space, privacy loss, storage constraints, higher food‑shopping costs, and occasional conflicts in shared settings. Positive outcomes highlighted less time spent on cleaning, lower maintenance expenses, increased urban mobility, more leisure time, and improved access to amenities. Participants also noted a feeling of “rightness” from forced decluttering and more mindful consumption.

Policy Implications – Urban Planning & Regulation

The authors recommend integrated urban planning that supplies high‑quality shared amenities, flexible building codes encouraging smaller units, graduated property taxes to discourage oversized dwellings, and housing‑exchange platforms to ease market transitions. Regulatory reforms should relax minimum‑size requirements, support rental markets, and consider caps on per‑capita floor area.

Societal Shifts – Norms and Support Systems

Beyond technical measures, the study stresses the need for cultural change away from the status symbol of large homes toward a “lagom” (just‑right) ethos. Community‑building initiatives, conflict‑resolution mechanisms, and inclusive decision‑making about house‑mates are identified as essential for fostering acceptance.

Key Findings for Sustainable Housing

• 29 % acceptance for downsizing; 21 % for shared housing.
• Energy consumption of households accounts for 27 % of EU final energy use, with space heating representing 60 % of that share.
• Average per‑person living space in the EU grew 16 % between 2000‑2018, underscoring the urgency of sufficiency measures.
• Structural barriers (housing market, norms) outweigh purely economic incentives.

Conclusions

The research demonstrates that while “living smaller” can deliver environmental benefits and personal time savings, its uptake is hindered by market structures and deep‑seated cultural expectations. Effective transition requires coordinated policy reforms, supportive urban infrastructure, and a societal shift toward valuing adequate rather than excessive living space. The findings provide a nuanced evidence base for pan‑European stakeholders seeking to promote sustainable, sufficiency‑oriented housing solutions.