Difference between revisions of "Right to housing"

From Urban Arena Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Provide short introduction here
The right to housing indicates the right of all individuals to have access to adequate shelter.
 
This page is part of an ongoing, open-ended online collaborative database, which collects relevant approaches that can be used by city-makers to tackle unsustainability and injustice in cities. It is based mainly on knowledge generated in EU-funded projects and touches on fast changing fields. As such, this page makes no claims of authoritative completeness and welcomes your suggestions.


==General introduction to approach==
==General introduction to approach==
This cluster identifies policies, practices and rights which can, or have the potential to, ensure citizens with social security. In particular, the approaches in this cluster aim at increasing social security to most vulnerable urban citizens suffering from poverty. The main recurrent theme of the cluster is housing rights framed as a fundamental aspect of social security. Access to housing can be provided through formal procedures (e.g. existing law enforcement) as well as informal practices (e.g. squatting vacant spaces). Other fundamental aspects of social security are: access to food, essential health care, basic education and income. Generally, the cluster highlights that these aspects should be supported by governmental/public institutions, i.e. welfare system. However, there are numerous existing approaches where citizens, social movements and non-governmental organizations act to fill the gaps of an absent state and provide informal social security.
Right to housing advocates that anyone should be provided with access to housing. As Michalis Goudis from [http://www.housingeurope.eu/ Housing Europe] stated “when comes to just and sustainable cities, housing is the first topic that needs to be addressed. To solve social exclusion first, you have to give people a roof, then you think about the rest. If you see it as a ladder, housing is the very first step”. On paper, right to housing is granted by several international and European laws. The network [http://www.housingrightswatch.org/page/eu-housing-rights Housing Right Watch], categorizes these laws into three clusters: United Nations housing rights<ref> http://www.housingrightswatch.org/page/un-housing-rights </ref>, Council of Europe housing rights<ref> http://www.housingrightswatch.org/page/council-europe-housing-rights </ref> and EU housing rights <ref>http://www.housingrightswatch.org/page/eu-housing-rights </ref>. In addition, each European country has its national laws on housing <ref> http://www.housingrightswatch.org/content/country-info </ref>. The EU funded project [https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/102183/brief/en TENLAW], for instance, explored and summarized all EU member states laws to inform citizens about their rights as tenants. If on the one hand housing can be provided through formal procedures (e.g. existing law enforcement), on the other hand there are multiple informal practices (e.g. squatting vacant spaces) which attempt to provide shelter. There are numerous existing initiatives where citizens, social movements and non-governmental organizations act to fill the gaps of a state unable to fully enforce right to housing.


==Shapes, sizes and applications==
==Shapes, sizes and applications==
Anti-gentrification toolkit (AGAPE): This approach responds to the increasing episodes of evictions, speculation and privatization on the urban European housing market. The anti-gentrification toolkit for policy makers and activists collects anti-eviction, anti-speculative, anti-privatization practices performed mainly in Southern European cities. For instance, tenants union lobbying has proved to be a successful practice in mitigating evictions. Similarly, social centers and housing movements have resisted displacement by squatting and re-claiming the right to use vacant urban spaces.


Tenancy and housing law (TENLAW): In a number of cases around Europe national tenancy and housing law ensures citizens with housing rights. However, it often occurs that these laws are not enforced because of the inaccessible language or tenant’s lack of knowledge. The project TENLAW has developed an accessible brochure “My right as a tenant in EU”  to inform citizens about their rights. Existing housing law is a legal and effective approach for citizens to see their right to housing respected. However, it might also be a limited one given that the legal system is not always a just one.
These a three examples of EU-fundend projects concerning the right to housing.  


Household resilience (RESCuE): A large number of vulnerable households in Europe has proven to be successful in mitigating poverty through self-initiatives which replace the absence of government’s support. Networks such as family, friends, church and other religious associations, schools, urban gardening, foodbanks, cultural events (and the list is still long) can strengthen household resilience against poverty.
Anti-gentrification toolkit ([https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/188216/brief/en AGAPE] 2014-2016): This approach responds to the increasing episodes of evictions, speculation and privatization on the urban European housing market. The anti-gentrification toolkit for policy makers and activists collects anti-eviction, anti-speculative, anti-privatization practices performed mainly in Southern European cities. For instance, tenants union lobbying has proved to be a successful practice in mitigating evictions. Similarly, social centers and housing movements have resisted displacement by squatting and re-claiming the right to use vacant urban spaces.


Urban Food Strategy (FOODLINKS): Along with housing, food remains one of the most important commodities to ensure social security. An Urban Food Strategy (UFS) connects different range of stakeholders (civil society, local producers, policy-makers etc.) to engage in the several stages of the food system and ensure fair access to food to consumers as well as fair compensation for local producers.
Tenancy and housing law ([https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/102183/brief/en TENLAW] 2012-2015): In a number of cases around Europe national tenancy and housing law ensures citizens with housing rights. However, it often occurs that these laws are not enforced because of the inaccessible language or tenant’s lack of knowledge. The project TENLAW has developed an accessible brochure “My right as a tenant in EU” to inform citizens about their rights. Existing housing law is a legal and effective approach for citizens to see their right to housing respected. However, it might also be a limited one given that the legal system is not always a just one.  


Basic Income (TRANSIT): A minimal income is essential to ensure citizens with the above mentioned aspects of social security, i.e. housing and food. A basic income  would give citizens the opportunity to be active in social solidarity work which would improve society as a whole and would be a means to achieve freedom, empowerment, and emancipation. Basic income has been demanded by social movements and academia for over 30 years and it has proven to be successful in reducing poverty (see Brazilian case). However, its level of transferability remains low for two main reasons: First, basic income classifies as a welfare measure which would require a substantial initial investment. Second, it is often challenged as a measure to protect “job-less free-riders”.
Household resilience ([https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/111253/brief/en RESCuE] 2014-2017): A large number of vulnerable households in Europe has proven to be successful in mitigating poverty through self-initiatives which replace the absence of government’s support. Networks such as family, friends, church and other religious associations, schools, urban gardening, foodbanks, cultural events (and the list is still long and can be viewed on [http://rescueproject.net/exhibition/ RESCuE online exhibition] can strengthen household resilience against poverty. The project RESCuE was able to prove that housing is a fundamental aspect from which a great number of household resilience actions can be started or can take place.


==Relation to UrbanA themes: Cities, sustainability, and justice==
==Relation to UrbanA themes: Cities, sustainability, and justice==
This cluster mainly addresses living conditions of vulnerable citizens in cities, although most approaches can also be implemented in rural areas . The cluster has a strong focus on social justice as all approaches’ goal is to provide vulnerable citizens with decent living standards, reducing the gap with wealthier classes who are able to fulfil all their needs. The underlying message is that social justice, i.e. social security and rights, can be achieved through formal government interventions. When such interventions are lacking, governments risk to create socially unjust dynamics: lack of housing, evictions, privatization of the public urban space, scarce food supply, and limited or no access to public transportation, education and basic income.
The right to housing addresses living conditions of vulnerable urban citizens which either have no access to housing or no access to adequate housing. As such, the right to housing has an inherent strong focus on social justice as the end goal is to provide vulnerable citizens with decent living standards, ultimately reducing the gap with wealthier classes who are able to fulfil their needs. The underlying message is that social justice can be achieved through formal government interventions. When such interventions are lacking, governments risk to create socially unjust dynamics: lack of housing, lack of affordable-habitable-safe housing, gentrification, evictions and privatisation of the public urban space.
This cluster does not include approaches which seek to achieve environmental sustainability as the end goal. Yet, in several approaches sustainability proves to go hand in hand with the pursuit of social justice. In urban areas, for instance, speculation and privatization often occur with the development of new city districts which require extensive input of natural capital; whereas most housing movements advocate for the reuse (and when needed the renovation) of existing vacant spaces as a solution to allocate social vulnerable citizens as well as to “recycle” existing spaces. In this sense, anti-gentrification practices have the potential to not only be socially just but also more sustainable. Overall, approaches to achieve social security can be implemented sustainably or can directly promote sustainability. The end goal, however, remains achieving social justice.
 
Approaches aimed at granting the right to housing do not necessarily seek to achieve environmental sustainability as the end goal. Yet, sustainability proves to go hand in hand with the pursuit of social justice when comes to provide everyone with a home. In urban areas, for instance, speculation and privatization often occur with the development of new city districts which require extensive input of natural capital; whereas most housing movements (e.g. housing for all) advocate for the reuse (and when needed the renovation) of existing vacant spaces as a solution to allocate socially vulnerable citizens. In this sense, there is no need for further natural resources input, but rather the desire to “recycle” existing vacant spaces or revisit the way in which existing housing is unjustly tenured on the free market. There is also a considerable amount of research on the drivers of injustice that can directly or indirectly cause housing inequalities. Green gentrification, for instance, suggests how urban regreening or re-naturing in distressed neighborhoods can contribute to residents’ exclusion, marginalization, and displacement. [http://www.bcnuej.org/projects/greenlulus/ GREENLULUS] (Green Locally Unwanted Land Uses) by [http://www.bcnuej.org/ Barcelona Lab for Urban Environmental Justice and Sustainability] stands as a unique project that explores if, and to what extent, greener cities are less racially and socially equitable or whether greening projects tend to increase environmental inequalities.
 
Overall, approaches to achieve right to housing for all can be implemented sustainably or can directly promote sustainability. The end goal, however, remains achieving social justice.


==Narrative of change==
==Narrative of change==
The main problem this cluster addresses is poverty, which means that a person cannot cover their basic needs such as food, shelter, and clothing. Although Europe is the region in the world which suffers less from poverty, in 2015 there were still 7.1 million people poor people (reference). The number grows exponentially considering people who can only cover their very basic needs, but are still unemployed and do not have access to education and proper health care. Nelson Mandela stated “Overcoming poverty isn’t a gesture of charity, it is an act of justice”. The underlying premise of this cluster is that a socially just and sustainable city must provide its most vulnerable citizens with the minimal level of social security.
Homelessness is the most severe form of neglection of the right to housing. However, as Michalis Goudis points out “nowadays professionals who cover fundamental roles in our urban centers, such as teachers and nurses, cannot afford to live in the cities where they work because of the high prices”. As the private market owes an increasing number of housing stocks, it becomes harder for public institutions to enforce the right to housing by, for instance, keeping rent prices affordable. This also has an impact on social and public housing as co-operatives or local municipalities themselves struggle to create housing opportunities for vulnerable citizens because of the large dominance of real estate market on urban housing stock. Pilar Garrido, lectures in Constitutional and Autonomous Community Law at the UPV/EHU University of the Basque Country, talks about the need for a “change of paradigm” (Garrido, 2012) <ref> https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/127089-the-effective-exercising-of-the-right-to-housing-is-calling-for-a-new-relationship-between-ho/en </ref>. A new paradigm is needed where all individuals and families, with no discrimination, have access to affordable, habitable and safe housing and where they are protected from evictions.


==Transformative potential==
==Transformative potential==
In its standard definition, social security is a government system which provides assistance in the form of free services or payment to its citizens living in poverty. In fact, social security is often referred as welfare system. On a conceptual level, a social security system, or welfare, challenges the model of neoliberal economy which seeks to reduce government spending for public purposes in favor of private sector interventions. As the approaches in the cluster show, however, there are a multitude of non-governmental practices which aim at ensuring greater social security such as social movements, churches, charity associations, unions, community’s gardens, family and friend’s networks, schools, NGOs . These informal, and usually public, actors aim at replacing the dominant neoliberal and capitalist logic of providing services for profits. At the same time, it sends a signal to public institutions on different scales which are unable, either because of a lack of political will or incapability, to provide social security to its citizens.
On a conceptual level, right to housing challenges the model of neoliberal economy which seeks to reduce government spending for public purposes (e.g. social and public housing) in favor of private sector interventions. The concept of "housing for all" is in inherent conflict with the ebbs and flows of a speculative neoliberal market. To challenge this, does not necessarily mean to abolish individuals’ and companies’ right to property, it rather puts pressure on public institutions to intervene and redefine the rules and boundaries under which the housing market operates.The increasing number of social movements demanding action in this direction indicates that the transformative potential of public institutions in very high (see for instance Berlin protests in April 2019 again rise in rent prices<ref> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47839821 </ref>).
Beside public institutions, there are many non-governmental actors which in a way or another try to grant vulnerable citizens the right housing. These are housing movements, churches, charity associations, unions, cooperatives, family and friend’s networks, and NGOs. These informal actors seek to provide housing based on a solidarity alternative view, which is opposing the dominant neoliberal and capitalist logic of providing housing services for profits. An example is the [https://moba.coop/ Moba cooperative], further explained in the next section. See also [[Co-living, co-housing & intentional communities]].
 
==Illustration of approach==
'''Cooperatives'''
 
The nature of housing cooperatives varies greatly across Europe, for this reason one cannot easily generalize on the role and the work they do. An interesting network of housing cooperatives which shares a similar model is the [https://moba.coop/ MOBA Housing Cooperative Network], located across eastern and southern Europe. Their final goal is to make housing more affordable and accessible to poorer residents. Their strength lies in holding responsibility for all processes involving the properties (e.g. contract, payment, construction works...). As they explained, the model "is centered around a cooperative of inhabitants that collectively develops, finances, maintains and operates a multi-apartment building. Because it controls the entire trajectory (and does not need to make profit), the resulting apartments are much more affordable for the inhabitants”.<ref> https://moba.coop/ </ref>
 
'''Social housing'''
 
Across Europe, social housing works in a number of different ways, it can be either provided by public institutions or by the private sector. Similarly, access to housing changes from country to country. In Sweden and Denmark, for instance, all citizens can apply for social housing, whereas in countries like Italy, citizens must fulfil certain requirements. In line with this, Denmark's social housing makes up 19% of their stock market, while Italy's social housing only represents 5% of the total housing market. A on-point review of Europe's social housing situation was published by Housing Europe in 2012 and can be read [http://www.housingeurope.eu/resource-105/the-housing-europe-review-2012 here].
 
Other solutions to ensure right to housing go into the direction of [[Co-living, co-housing & intentional communities]].
 
==Suggested key readings & links==
''Links''
*European Action Coalition for the Right to Housing and to the City: https://housingnotprofit.org/
*The Shift #Right2Housing: https://www.make-the-shift.org/
*Rent Strike 2020: https://thenewinquiry.com/rent-strike-2020/
*Right to the City Alliance - Fighting for democracy, justice, and sustainability in our cities: https://righttothecity.org/
*Homes for all: https://homesforall.org/
*Plataforma de Afectados por la Hipoteca (PAH): https://afectadosporlahipoteca.com/
 


==Summary of relevant approaches==
''Publications''
An Urban Food Strategy (UFS) seeks to ensure social security through food production and consumption: “Food can function as a vehicle to integrate the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainability, and to address justice and health issues in cities”(Moragues at al., 2013b, p.1). A UFS can contribute to environmental sustainability by reducing emissions of Co2 throughout the whole food system chain and be more energy efficient. Its main premise is to promote more sustainable food: more local, more vegetarian, healthier, more organic and more cultural-appropriated food. On the social justice level, it can help to fight food poverty, improve access to healthier food, and ensure fairness throughout the food chain, e.g. fair compensation for farmers. The strategy has the potential to achieve social security on several levels because of its holistic approach, involving the public and private sector, policy-makers, civil society, citizens, and considering all the different stages of the food system: production, processing, storage, transport, retail, consumption and waste.
*Colau, A., & Alemany, A. (2014). Mortgaged Lives: From the housing bubble to the right to housing. Journal of Aesthetics & Protest Press. https://doi.org/https://www.joaap.org/press/pah/mortgagedlives.pdf
Local governments play an important role in the successful implementation of a UFS. Some practical actions are: provide financial support for local food related projects; designate land for (peri)urban agriculture and gardening; allocate time to civil servants to develop UFS and involve citizens in playing an active role through educational activities. Successful cases of UFSs come from Bristol (UK) and Malmö (Sweden) . In Bristol the UFS was mainly pushed by an active civil society which led to the creation of Bristol’s Food Policy Council, which supports urban food growing networks and its people involved (see: Bristol Food Network). In Malmö, the implementation of the UFS was mainly led by Malmö municipality which set to reduce greenhouse gas emission through food procurement, by replacing meat with lentils and pulses and by aiming to only serve organic food by 2020 (see: Policy for sustainable development and food, the City of Malmö).
*García-Lamarca, M. (2017). From Occupying Plazas to Recuperating Housing: Insurgent Practices in Spain. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 41(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12386
Overall, a UFS challenges the current mainstream food system which has produced negative consequences in terms of health, environment, justice and economy. A UFS aims at addressing all these negative consequences by offering a viable sustainable and just alternative which has already proved to work in a number of cities across Europe.
*García-Lamarca, M. (2017). Creating political subjects: Collective knowledge and action to enact housing rights in Spain | Community Development Journal | Oxford Academic. Community Development Journal, 52(3), 421–435. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsx025
*García-Lamarca, M., & Kaika, M. (2016). ‘Mortgaged lives’: The biopolitics of debt and housing financialisation. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(3), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12126
*Roy, A., & Malson, H. (Eds.). (2019). Housing justice in unequal cities. Institute on Inequality and Democracy. https://doi.org/https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10141152
*Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Garcia-Lamarca, M., Cole, H., & Pearsall, H. (2019). New scholarly pathways on green gentrification: What does the urban ‘green turn’ mean and where is it going? Progress in Human Geography, 43(6), 1064–1086. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518803799


==References==
==References==
<references />
<references />


[[Category: Clusters of approaches]]
[[Category: Approaches]]
[[Category: Approaches]]
 
[[Category: Right to housing]]
Moragues, A.; Morgan, K.; Moschitz, H.; Neimane, I.; Nilsson, H.; Pinto, M.; Rohracher,H.; Ruiz, R.; Thuswald, M.; Tisenkopfs, T. and Halliday, J. (2013) Urban Food Strategies: the rough guide to sustainable food systems. Document developed in the framework of the FP7 project FOODLINKS (GA No. 265287)
[[Category: Co-living, co-housing & intentional communities]]
 
[[Category: Policies and practices for inclusion of disadvantaged groups]]
Summary and recommendations for local governments, in: Moragues, A.; Morgan, K.; Moschitz, H.; Neimane, I.; Nilsson, H.; Pinto, M.; Rohracher,H.; Ruiz, R.; Thuswald, M.; Tisenkopfs, T. and Halliday, J. (2013) Urban Food Strategies: the rough guide to sustainable food systems. Document developed in the framework of the FP7 project FOODLINKS (GA No. 265287)
[[Category: Reconceptualising urban justice and sustainability]]
[[Category: TENLAW]]
[[Category: MOBA Cooperative]]

Latest revision as of 22:26, 7 January 2021

The right to housing indicates the right of all individuals to have access to adequate shelter.

This page is part of an ongoing, open-ended online collaborative database, which collects relevant approaches that can be used by city-makers to tackle unsustainability and injustice in cities. It is based mainly on knowledge generated in EU-funded projects and touches on fast changing fields. As such, this page makes no claims of authoritative completeness and welcomes your suggestions.

General introduction to approach

Right to housing advocates that anyone should be provided with access to housing. As Michalis Goudis from Housing Europe stated “when comes to just and sustainable cities, housing is the first topic that needs to be addressed. To solve social exclusion first, you have to give people a roof, then you think about the rest. If you see it as a ladder, housing is the very first step”. On paper, right to housing is granted by several international and European laws. The network Housing Right Watch, categorizes these laws into three clusters: United Nations housing rights[1], Council of Europe housing rights[2] and EU housing rights [3]. In addition, each European country has its national laws on housing [4]. The EU funded project TENLAW, for instance, explored and summarized all EU member states laws to inform citizens about their rights as tenants. If on the one hand housing can be provided through formal procedures (e.g. existing law enforcement), on the other hand there are multiple informal practices (e.g. squatting vacant spaces) which attempt to provide shelter. There are numerous existing initiatives where citizens, social movements and non-governmental organizations act to fill the gaps of a state unable to fully enforce right to housing.

Shapes, sizes and applications

These a three examples of EU-fundend projects concerning the right to housing.

Anti-gentrification toolkit (AGAPE 2014-2016): This approach responds to the increasing episodes of evictions, speculation and privatization on the urban European housing market. The anti-gentrification toolkit for policy makers and activists collects anti-eviction, anti-speculative, anti-privatization practices performed mainly in Southern European cities. For instance, tenants union lobbying has proved to be a successful practice in mitigating evictions. Similarly, social centers and housing movements have resisted displacement by squatting and re-claiming the right to use vacant urban spaces.

Tenancy and housing law (TENLAW 2012-2015): In a number of cases around Europe national tenancy and housing law ensures citizens with housing rights. However, it often occurs that these laws are not enforced because of the inaccessible language or tenant’s lack of knowledge. The project TENLAW has developed an accessible brochure “My right as a tenant in EU” to inform citizens about their rights. Existing housing law is a legal and effective approach for citizens to see their right to housing respected. However, it might also be a limited one given that the legal system is not always a just one.

Household resilience (RESCuE 2014-2017): A large number of vulnerable households in Europe has proven to be successful in mitigating poverty through self-initiatives which replace the absence of government’s support. Networks such as family, friends, church and other religious associations, schools, urban gardening, foodbanks, cultural events (and the list is still long and can be viewed on RESCuE online exhibition can strengthen household resilience against poverty. The project RESCuE was able to prove that housing is a fundamental aspect from which a great number of household resilience actions can be started or can take place.

Relation to UrbanA themes: Cities, sustainability, and justice

The right to housing addresses living conditions of vulnerable urban citizens which either have no access to housing or no access to adequate housing. As such, the right to housing has an inherent strong focus on social justice as the end goal is to provide vulnerable citizens with decent living standards, ultimately reducing the gap with wealthier classes who are able to fulfil their needs. The underlying message is that social justice can be achieved through formal government interventions. When such interventions are lacking, governments risk to create socially unjust dynamics: lack of housing, lack of affordable-habitable-safe housing, gentrification, evictions and privatisation of the public urban space.

Approaches aimed at granting the right to housing do not necessarily seek to achieve environmental sustainability as the end goal. Yet, sustainability proves to go hand in hand with the pursuit of social justice when comes to provide everyone with a home. In urban areas, for instance, speculation and privatization often occur with the development of new city districts which require extensive input of natural capital; whereas most housing movements (e.g. housing for all) advocate for the reuse (and when needed the renovation) of existing vacant spaces as a solution to allocate socially vulnerable citizens. In this sense, there is no need for further natural resources input, but rather the desire to “recycle” existing vacant spaces or revisit the way in which existing housing is unjustly tenured on the free market. There is also a considerable amount of research on the drivers of injustice that can directly or indirectly cause housing inequalities. Green gentrification, for instance, suggests how urban regreening or re-naturing in distressed neighborhoods can contribute to residents’ exclusion, marginalization, and displacement. GREENLULUS (Green Locally Unwanted Land Uses) by Barcelona Lab for Urban Environmental Justice and Sustainability stands as a unique project that explores if, and to what extent, greener cities are less racially and socially equitable or whether greening projects tend to increase environmental inequalities.

Overall, approaches to achieve right to housing for all can be implemented sustainably or can directly promote sustainability. The end goal, however, remains achieving social justice.

Narrative of change

Homelessness is the most severe form of neglection of the right to housing. However, as Michalis Goudis points out “nowadays professionals who cover fundamental roles in our urban centers, such as teachers and nurses, cannot afford to live in the cities where they work because of the high prices”. As the private market owes an increasing number of housing stocks, it becomes harder for public institutions to enforce the right to housing by, for instance, keeping rent prices affordable. This also has an impact on social and public housing as co-operatives or local municipalities themselves struggle to create housing opportunities for vulnerable citizens because of the large dominance of real estate market on urban housing stock. Pilar Garrido, lectures in Constitutional and Autonomous Community Law at the UPV/EHU University of the Basque Country, talks about the need for a “change of paradigm” (Garrido, 2012) [5]. A new paradigm is needed where all individuals and families, with no discrimination, have access to affordable, habitable and safe housing and where they are protected from evictions.

Transformative potential

On a conceptual level, right to housing challenges the model of neoliberal economy which seeks to reduce government spending for public purposes (e.g. social and public housing) in favor of private sector interventions. The concept of "housing for all" is in inherent conflict with the ebbs and flows of a speculative neoliberal market. To challenge this, does not necessarily mean to abolish individuals’ and companies’ right to property, it rather puts pressure on public institutions to intervene and redefine the rules and boundaries under which the housing market operates.The increasing number of social movements demanding action in this direction indicates that the transformative potential of public institutions in very high (see for instance Berlin protests in April 2019 again rise in rent prices[6]). Beside public institutions, there are many non-governmental actors which in a way or another try to grant vulnerable citizens the right housing. These are housing movements, churches, charity associations, unions, cooperatives, family and friend’s networks, and NGOs. These informal actors seek to provide housing based on a solidarity alternative view, which is opposing the dominant neoliberal and capitalist logic of providing housing services for profits. An example is the Moba cooperative, further explained in the next section. See also Co-living, co-housing & intentional communities.

Illustration of approach

Cooperatives

The nature of housing cooperatives varies greatly across Europe, for this reason one cannot easily generalize on the role and the work they do. An interesting network of housing cooperatives which shares a similar model is the MOBA Housing Cooperative Network, located across eastern and southern Europe. Their final goal is to make housing more affordable and accessible to poorer residents. Their strength lies in holding responsibility for all processes involving the properties (e.g. contract, payment, construction works...). As they explained, the model "is centered around a cooperative of inhabitants that collectively develops, finances, maintains and operates a multi-apartment building. Because it controls the entire trajectory (and does not need to make profit), the resulting apartments are much more affordable for the inhabitants”.[7]

Social housing

Across Europe, social housing works in a number of different ways, it can be either provided by public institutions or by the private sector. Similarly, access to housing changes from country to country. In Sweden and Denmark, for instance, all citizens can apply for social housing, whereas in countries like Italy, citizens must fulfil certain requirements. In line with this, Denmark's social housing makes up 19% of their stock market, while Italy's social housing only represents 5% of the total housing market. A on-point review of Europe's social housing situation was published by Housing Europe in 2012 and can be read here.

Other solutions to ensure right to housing go into the direction of Co-living, co-housing & intentional communities.

Suggested key readings & links

Links


Publications

References