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

The research paper “Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU” is published by Buildings & Cities. It is authored by Matthias Lehner, Jessika Luth Richter, Halliki Kreinin, Pia Mamut, Edina Vadovics, Josefine Henman, Oksana Mont, and Doris Fuchs, and it examines reducing per-capita living space (downsizing and/or sharing housing) as a housing-sufficiency strategy in the European Union.

The study investigates acceptance, motivations, and side-effects of voluntarily living smaller in five EU countries: Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Spain, and Sweden. Evidence comes from extensive qualitative material gathered in citizen and stakeholder “thinking labs” (interactive workshops) conducted from September 2022 to February 2024 within the Horizon 2020 project “EU 1.5° Lifestyles.” The analysis synthesizes expectations (acceptance labs), lived experiences of people who had downsized (effects labs), and discussions on societal pathways and responsible actors (pathways and stakeholder labs).

Across all five countries, “giving up excess square metres” and “choosing shared housing” were the least favoured housing-related low-carbon options. Average approval for giving up excess floor area was 29%, while choosing shared housing averaged 21%. Country results reported include: “give up excess square metres” (Germany 25%, Hungary 15%, Latvia 23%, Spain 42%, Sweden 38%) and “choose shared housing” (Germany 13%, Hungary 11%, Latvia 28%, Spain 33%, Sweden 19%). Key barriers discussed were housing-market complexity and risk (especially in urban areas), regulatory frameworks that favour long-term ownership, and social inequality. Participants also associated shared living with reduced privacy and autonomy, fear of conflict, and disruption of routines or established neighbourhood ties.

Among participants who had already reduced their living space, motivations spanned value-based, practical, economic, and structural drivers. Value-based reasons included reducing environmental impacts and views that excess space is socially unfair. Practical triggers included changing household composition (e.g., children leaving home, separation/divorce), a desire for central locations and proximity to work/services, and reducing time spent on maintenance and cleaning. Economic pressures such as rising rents, energy costs, overheads, or mortgages also featured as important triggers.

Reported challenges included reduced ability to host visitors, fewer social gatherings, difficulties fitting furniture and belongings, limited storage (including food storage), and in shared situations, heightened noise and reduced peace and quiet. Some participants described worsened mood, feelings of confinement, and increased conflicts with co-habitants or neighbours; specific hobbies (e.g., gardening or playing instruments) could become harder. Positive effects were also reported: forced decluttering, more careful acquisition of goods, sharing items with others, and substantially less time spent furnishing, cleaning, and maintaining the home. Many described more leisure time, lower stress, improved access to infrastructure in more central locations, and stronger neighbourhood connections as activities shifted toward common spaces.

Acceptance improved when participants considered supportive societal changes. Enablers included better shared and community amenities (sports, play, barbeque and social spaces), greener and more walkable neighbourhoods, and a more flexible housing market (e.g., housing-exchange platforms and fewer administrative barriers). The paper emphasizes that urbanization can be a major driving force for space-efficient living if guided well. Policy and governance measures discussed include reconfiguring regulatory norms and economic incentives, supporting the creation of smaller units, enabling reconfiguration of existing large dwellings, strengthening rental-market options, using taxation signals for large properties, and building institutions for community building and conflict counselling so that smaller/shared living does not reduce quality of life.