Resource Overview
This research brief, “To what extent can housing as a social right be realized in contemporary housing markets?”, is published by the Progressive Politics Research Network and authored by Lindsay B. Flynn (University of Luxembourg) and Giuseppe Montalbano (University of Luxembourg). It examines European housing markets, contrasting the asset‑oriented model with the social‑right model, and assesses recent policy shifts across Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands.
Policy Landscape
Since the early 2000s, European housing policy has largely treated housing as a financial asset, encouraging homeownership, expanding mortgage markets, deregulating rentals, and reducing social housing stock. The brief notes that after the 2008 financial crisis, most countries reinforced this asset‑centric approach, though late‑2010s reforms began to introduce rent controls, subsidies, and public‑private partnerships aimed at affordability.
Key Data Points
- European house prices rose on average 53 % between 2015 and 2024 (Eurostat).
- Homeownership rates have declined across most European nations, while private rental dependence has increased, especially among low‑income and younger households.
- Housing wealth concentration is growing: in eleven European countries and the United States, wealth is increasingly held by higher‑income households, with a notable “hollowing‑out” of the middle class in Austria, France, Greece, Italy, and Luxembourg.
Country Cases
- Spain: Introduced rent controls with generous tax compensation, yet allowed many exemptions, balancing landlord interests with tenant protection.
- Netherlands: Implemented rent caps with numerous exceptions, reflecting a cautious approach to price regulation.
- Germany: Strengthened public‑private partnerships for affordable housing, combining state involvement with market actors.
Tensions Between Rights and Assets
The brief highlights that housing as a social right requires state‑led provision or market‑shaping regulations, while the asset model relies on deregulation and investment incentives. Policies that lower housing costs in the short term (e.g., rent controls) may unintentionally raise prices over the medium‑to‑long term if not carefully monitored.
Levers for Change
Short‑term tools: rental subsidies, moderate rent controls, targeted to high‑pressure markets and vulnerable households, with ongoing impact monitoring. Long‑term strategies: expanding social housing provision, encouraging tenure neutrality to remove homeownership bias, and fostering multiple affordable housing pathways for diverse household goals.
Political Implications
The research indicates that housing market dynamics influence political behaviour. While traditional links tied homeownership to conservative voting, recent evidence shows mixed patterns, with younger renters and owners sometimes forming a bloc favouring redistribution. Policy reforms may reshape party agendas, especially as housing salience increases.
Path Forward for Sustainable Housing
The brief suggests that sustainable, pan‑European housing solutions should combine short‑term affordability measures with long‑term investment in socially‑oriented housing stock. Emphasising tenure neutrality and integrating environmental standards into new construction can align housing policy with broader sustainability goals.
Conclusion
Overall, the brief documents a gradual shift from a dominant asset‑centric paradigm toward a more balanced approach that recognises housing as a social right, while noting persistent structural resistance. Continued monitoring, strategic policy coupling, and inclusive reforms are essential for achieving equitable and sustainable housing across Europe.