Towards a new Existenzminimum

Building costs play a significant role in determining the affordability of a housing project, and these depend to a large extent on design choices. This paper is based on the premise that collaborative design processes, or co-design, used in collaborative housing (CH) in Europe reduce building costs and consequently increase the affordability of these housing projects. However, research remains scarce on the extent to which CH is an affordable solution from a design perspective compared to affordable mainstream housing (MH), in which no co-design is used. Therefore, this paper aims to fill this knowledge gap by assessing the impact of design choices on building costs in CH and MH. To this end, we developed a simulation model to compare the building costs of CH with MH based on their design choices. Findings indicate that CH represents a more affordable and space-efficient solution when compared to MH, if we look at the building costs per unit. This is because CH provides less expensive units while it includes larger common spaces and extra quality. These results help to refute existing claims about the unaffordability of CH design solutions.

Against the background of the current housing affordability crisis, a new wave of ‘collaborative housing’ (CH) is developing in many European cities. In this paper, CH refers to housing projects where residents choose to share certain spaces and are involved in the design phase. While many authors point to the alleged economic benefits of living in CH, the (collaborative) design dimension is rarely mentioned in relation to affordability. This paper seeks to fill this knowledge gap by identifying design criteria used in CH to reduce building costs, increasing this way its affordability. We carry out a comparative case study research, where we assess the design phase of 16 CH projects in different European cities. Findings suggest that collaborative design processes increase the chances of improving housing affordability, mainly due to the often-applied needs-based approach and the redefinition of minimum housing standards. Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2021.2009778 .

During the housing crisis of the 1920s, the German concept Existenzminimum (minimum dwelling) was developed and applied to the construction of public social housing. It was considered a design laboratory, where research, design, and experimentation would focus on a unique goal: create a space-efficient affordable housing typology, based on minimum quality standards. Empirical evidence indicates a renewed interest in alternative design solutions and minimum dwelling approaches over the last decade: examples include micro-housing solutions and collaborative housing models. This is due to the current affordable crisis and the increasing trend of urbanisation. However, little is known about the current interpretation of Existenzminimum. What does the concept entail today and how has it developed? This article investigates if and how Existenzminimum is currently applied: first, it unfolds the core design principles of the original Existenzminimum. Then, these principles are used to assess if and how existing affordable or low-cost housing approaches are current (re)interpretations of the concept. Finally, the article proposes a definition for a contemporary Existenzminimum, arguing that a better understanding and awareness of the concept can help urban planners, designers, policy-makers and citizens in developing alternative affordable housing solutions.

Increasingly, collaborative housing models are upscaled, institutionalised and new governance and finance arrangements are formed. These ‘hybrid’ collective housing projects, to be situated in between mainstream housing and emerging collaborative housing projects, are subject to varying degrees of actors’ power and control. This paper further develops the conceptual framework of Sudiyono and Czischke, visualising the relationship between users, institutional actors, and housing providers, with the addition of a temporal and vectorial component, allowing for a differentiation of actor involvement throughout the development process. The temporal and vectorial dimensions are particularly important when evaluating responsibilities of residents and civil society actors in the development process of collaborative housing projects. The paper shows how the framework can be used to interpret and communicate changes within housing development schemes and indicates how housing and land policy can play a pivotal role in facilitating and regulating the emergence of mainstream collective housing schemes. Drawing upon developments in Amsterdam, Hamburg and Copenhagen, the extended framework allows to critically assess the changing roles and circumstances within housing projects and their role in addressing challenges in urban housing markets.

Collaborative housing is considered a long-term housing option based on the idea of sharing space in a community-boosting manner. Residents share areas like laundry, utility or leisure rooms. On this basis the authors argue that housing may be treated as a commodity that could be shared just like sharing economy goods are. Thus the aim of this study is to evaluate the potential of collaborative housing from the sharing economy perspective. To achieve the aim, concepts of Curtis and Lehner (2019) and Curtis (2021) were applied to check what collaborative housing lacks to become a fully-fledged sharing economy entity. Apart from the nature of housing, which is by no means a fast moving consumer good, the lack of a digital platform that is the basis of most sharing economy entities, is the most visible difference between collaborative housing and sharing economy entities. Moreover, a questionnaire survey was conducted among prospective housing market users in Poland to check their awareness and readiness for this housing option. The research findings confirmed that they are still very low among housing market participants and private property is still considered considerably better than shared property. However, a tighter connection between collaborative housing and the sharing economy may provide the impetus for the young generation to enter this form of housing. The study is a contribution to the debate on collective housing options in Europe and may be considered novel as it attempts to conceptualize and position collaborative housing within the sharing economy context.

The complexities of contemporary planning, the urgent need for affordable housing and increasing demands for sustainable development are pushing current housing provision practices to their limits. In response, more collaborative housing approaches have (re)gained prominence in recent decades, offering diverse sustainability potentials. This paper explores the framing of sustainability within European and US literature on collaborative housing while contrasting the perceived sustainability potential with practical implementation challenges. Approached through a systematic sample of selected literature, the socio-economic and environmental sustainability claims associated with collaborative housing are explored. This analysis outlines identified knowledge gaps, financial hurdles, and political challenges, offering insights into the emerging discourse on structural support for collaborative housing models. The findings indicate an absence of substantiated support for the sustainability claims made, emphasising a reliance on individual case studies. Furthermore, a disparity emerges between the potential of sustainable collaborative housing and the current policy environment’s capacity to facilitate their realisation. This research underscores the urgency of strengthening empirical foundations and aligning policies and instruments to bridge the gap between sustainability aspirations and the realities of the housing sector.

Enhancing affordable housing policy through green building principles: An integrated participatory system modelling approach

This contribution addresses how self‐managed collaborative housing (CoHo) groups engage in and with urban planning in Vienna and thereby how they manage the ambivalence of simultaneously getting involved in established planning and maintaining their alternative and subversive character. These groups aim to shape their own living environments and contribute to more sustainable, affordable, and collaborative housing and living. The relations and interactions between self‐managed housing projects and municipal planning actors are ambivalent and include both invited and uninvited forms of engagement. To be able to realise their projects and to intervene in urban planning, CoHo groups thus need to manage the boundary between making their aims compatible with <em>and</em> challenging urban planning visions and strategies. I analyse this by paying attention to how CoHo actors enact “invitability” while maintaining their resistance against certain urban policies. For doing so, I draw on and contribute to literature at the intersection of urban planning and STS that address public participation in collaborations and controversy contexts. The empirical materials stem from a multi‐sited ethnography, comprising interviews with members and proponents of CoHo groups, observations of public and semi‐public events of, with, and about CoHo, as well as documents and social media posts. I find that CoHo creates invitability by negotiating and working on three aspects that are directly or indirectly challenged by municipal and professional actors: their relevance, expertise, and reliability. They do so by engaging in infrastructuring activities that stabilise both the invitability and resistance of CoHo in Vienna.

In this article, we discuss the role of solidarity in collaborative housing in relation to the trajectory and discourse of the Danish idea of co-operative housing (andelstanken). Our analytical perspective draws on the concept of social mechanisms and a framework suggested by the social scientist Steinar Stjernø. We argue that collaborative housing based on individual (home) ownership of shares and user-rights to apartments are susceptible to the mechanism of “conflicting interests between different categories on the housing market”. Moreover, we suggest that this mechanism has a tendency to further the economic interests of residents, at the expense of the external solidarity with groups looking to access affordable housing. Our argument is supported by theoretical reflection, the historical trajectory of co-operative housing in Scandinavia and empirical analysis of the Danish case.

Introduction: As the population count in cities increases, the need for affordable and efficient housing systems becomes even more pressing, especially for the poor and middle-income earners. Housing affordability challenges are an important area to which real estate strategies contribute, and this includes funding schemes, resource-efficient construction methods, and a repurposing of structures for different functions. These strategies work towards achieving the goal of closing the deficit of housing availability in the market as well as meeting the necessary criteria for sustainability and habitability of cities of the future. Materials and Methods: The research methodology employed a comprehensive literature review, analysing peer-reviewed articles, industry reports, and case studies from diverse urban contexts. The data collection was majorly centered on successful affordable housing projects, policies, and approaches used in various city settings. Both quantitative and qualitative assessments were used in the studies for comparative analysis of different strategies and solutions with respect to their efficiency and applicability with regard to cost-saving, mass implementation, and social aspects. Finally, a focus on the world of urban planning and real estate with interviews with professionals in these fields as well as policymakers gave an understanding of possible actual difficulties and opportunities of realizing affordable housing strategies. Results: The study revealed several key findings regarding effective real estate strategies for affordable housing. Financing models that were discussed in this paper include public-private partnerships and community land trusts showed promising results regarding the possibility of decreasing housing prices and making housing more accessible. Techno-friendly mechanisms such as modular construction accompanied by the use of lightweight building materials were perceived to be helpful in increasing the rate of construction of houses while reducing the effects of the construction activities on the physical environment. Adaptive reuse mortels demonstrated that movement’s ability to re purpose inactive urban areas as viable affordable housing opportunities satisfied both the demand for housing and site redevelopment. In addition, policy interventions like inclusionary zoning and density bonus were useful in enhancing the private sector’s engagement in affordable housing. Discussion: The research findings highlight the multifaceted nature of affordable housing solutions and the importance of context-specific strategies. Some strategies like public-private partnerships, could be adopted in any city regardless of the type, however the decision on their application depended on the local socio-economic situation and legislation. Effective implementation of sustainable construction depended on appropriate skills by human resources and favourable policies. Architects and developers of adaptive reuse projects encountered issues with code conformity and reception among the population. These findings suggest that the solution to affordable housing must employ the right mix of innovative real estate solutions, supportive public policies, and active community participation. Conclusion: Real estate strategies offer promising avenues for addressing the affordable housing crisis in rapidly growing urban areas. Innovative financing strategies; efficient construction practices; as well as adaptive reuse strategies provide an opportunity for extending the amount of affordable housing in cities alongside sustainable development. However, the accomplishment of these strategies entails cooperation from public, private, and the community sectors

Maintenance cost of buildings could constitute a major cost burden on low income housing dwellers. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between physical condition and maintenance cost of low income housing buildings. Data was gathered using structured questionnaire and score sheets. The questionnaires elicited responses on the respondents’ perception of their buildings’ physical condition. The score sheets were used by trained research assistants to generate information on the state of the physical conditions of the buildings. Data analyses were carried out using Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman’s correlation. The study found that the element with the highest relative condition index (RCI=0.78) is internal walls, while external wall finishes/decoration has the least (RCI=0.45). Similarly, the element with the highest quality index (QI=0.88) is soak away pit and septic tank, while internal ceiling finishes/decoration has the least QI (0.49). It was further discovered that a significant difference exists between the RCI which is based on the respondents’ perceptions, and the QI which is based on the research assistants’ scores. The relationship between QI and annual maintenance cost is not significant, while the relationship between RCI and annual maintenance cost is significant. It was concluded that the perception of the condition of a building by its owner, rather than the physical state of the building is the main driver of maintenance cost. The study recommends that low income housing end users should be allowed to make inputs at the conception and planning stages of their buildings.

Indicators of security and affordability of housing are one of the main indicators of social security of the population, its level of well-being. Assessment of the security and affordability of housing is relevant and the subject of research in modern economic science. The article discloses approaches to the calculation of these indicators, provides statistical data showing the provision of housing in the Republic of Belarus, the dynamics of changes in this indicator. The deviations of the indicator of housing affordability by regions and the city of Minsk from the average republican value have been calculated, which makes it possible to assess the severity of the social problem of housing security in the capital. The estimated part includes an assessment of the life cycle cost of a multi-storey residential building of typical consumer characteristics for a period of 50 years. It is proposed to assess the affordability of housing, taking into account not only the one-time costs of building or purchasing housing, but also the periodic costs of the life cycle of real estate objects: operating costs, maintenance costs, capital repairs and, ultimately, demolition. This approach allows you to estimate the total cost of home ownership. In this case, the indicator of the affordability of housing is the period of time that a citizen spends in order to earn sufficient funds for the purchase and operation of housing.

In the 1990s in Berlin the Baugruppen movement developed an innovative housing project as a “typological” experimentation. Several case studies will be analysed based on the users’ needs, the self-made construction, affordable options, collaborative housing, and creative participation. Once this model has been known a potential alternative can be applied to the shortage of housing options in Europe. This paper analyses several case-studies realized in Berlin which could be defined as a compact “vertical village” or “vertical mat-building” by land consumption reduction. Adopting the theoretical approach of the Baugruppen, the case studies will be evaluated through five key points: common infrastructure, personalized spheres, variable volume, hanging gardens, and shared common spaces, to validate their “typological” experimental quality.

Purpose – Across use adaptation is a possible way of dealing with long term vacant office buildings, albeit previous research shows that there are many obstacles to be thrived. In The Netherlands several successful transformations of offices into housing were completed. Nevertheless, transformations do not take place on a large scale. High building costs are the main reason. Hence, new office developments should anticipate future programmatic transformation. This paper seeks answers to the questions: Is it possible to anticipate future programmatic change? To what extent will anticipation on future possibilities influence building costs?Design/methodology/approach – The authors reviewed existing studies to gather information about transformation building costs and the critical success factors of transformations. The building design and costs for new office buildings were then studied, designed with enhanced transformation potential, focussing on two standard office building types, the central core tower a...

This article explores the decommodification strategies of a collaborative housing project in Vienna, drawing on Karl Polanyi’s socioeconomic principles: market exchange, redistribution and reciprocity. It engages with Polanyi’s foundational contributions, as well as the broader welfare state and housing studies literature to develop an analytical framework for analysing decommodification in collaborative housing. Using this Polanyi-inspired framework, the article conducts an in-depth analysis of decommodification across the entire provisioning process, including the production, distribution and consumption of this collaborative housing initiative. It examines internal strategies – such as alternative financing and hybrid ownership structures – along the initiative’s wider embedding in the Viennese housing system, as well as effects on affordability. The findings demonstrate how the initiative achieves high levels of decommodification by altering the composition of socioeconomic principles on multiple scales, offering insights into the complex mixed economy of collaborative housing in Vienna. This provides a deeper understanding of how decommodification functions in housing provision in general and in collaborative housing forms in particular.