Housing as a ‘Double Irritant’ in EU Law: Towards an SGEI between Markets and Local Needs

Abstract

European cities are facing an ‘alarming housing challenge’.1 There is less and less affordable housing in urban areas. The social housing stock has decreased everywhere. Homelessness is on the rise. With growing private housing markets and shrinking social housing stock2 social and spatial inequality increases, local living conditions deteriorate, and the problems of urban security rise.3 Rental prices have skyrocketed, especially in high-demand areas, such as Barcelona.4 In addition, a boom in tourism has led to housing units being used for non-residential purposes and international capital investment. In Berlin, property prices have increased by 120 per cent in the last 15 years, with an increase of 20 per cent in 2017 alone.5 The causes of this housing crisis have their roots in the financialization and commodification of housing6 and the urbanization of capital.7 In financial terms, urban private property is not primarily thought of as a residence, but as an investment which should yield maximized returns. Big cities—in their aspirations as centres for international trade and banking—have developed into highly concentrated command points in the world economy, key locations for finance and specialized services and as sites of production and innovation,8 all of them attracting a global workforce. This makes cities attractive locations for storing value and absorbing global overaccumulation in the built environment.9 By reflecting this global requirement for a safe haven for capital, urban housing markets are becoming increasingly detached from the dynamics of local (and national) demand and supply and, in this way, the housing market transforms the urban political economy.10 In fact, many European cities, in terms of access to affordable housing, have more in common with each other than with smaller settlements in their hinterlands.