The housing crisis is widespread and severe. It stems from a variety of intertwined factors, including limited supply, urbanization, changes in household structure, the weakening role of public and social housing, energy challenges, and the impact of tourism and short-term rentals. One of the most significant factors, however, is financial speculation and commodification. In other words, the issue of housing is deeply entangled with the global economic order.
After World War II, industrialized states financed large-scale public housing projects. The advent of neoliberal capitalism in the 1970s, however, paved the way for privatization, deregulation, and the free flow of capital—a shift facilitated by the suspension of the U.S. dollar’s convertibility into gold in 1971. The role of the state in market affairs diminished; former public housing was sold to tenants through mortgages, and private actors assumed primary responsibility for new construction. In this process, housing shifted from being treated as a public good to being valued as a financial asset. Responsibility for securing shelter moved from the state to the individual repaying a mortgage.
This system has had severe consequences. Rising prices and easy credit concealed growing inequalities. Household debt soon outpaced income, inflating housing markets and contributing to the 2008 financial crash, which left millions jobless or homeless. In its aftermath, governments tightened mortgage regulations: stricter lending rules reduced systemic risk but also limited access to credit for many.
What can be done in response? To counter market pressures, governments can adopt top-down measures (see below) or invest in participatory and community-led housing, thereby supporting the well-being, prosperity, and resilience of local communities. Bottom-up initiatives rooted in collective self-organization can articulate alternatives and act as strong partners to public institutions.
MOVIE TIPS
Before the fall of the totalitarian regime in Czechoslovakia in 1989, most housing was publicly owned—either by the state or by housing cooperatives. After the political transition, much of this housing stock was in poor technical condition and required substantial investment. Privatization was seen as the solution and became the cornerstone of Czech housing policy. For instance, since the 1990s, Prague has privatized over 80 % of its municipal housing stock and now owns only about 5 % of the city’s total housing.
As a result, municipalities today hold a weak position in the housing market and are unable to provide alternatives when market prices become unaffordable. Urban residents face high rents, short-term and unstable lease agreements, and soaring property prices that make mortgages inaccessible for many.
Expanding Public Housing Stock
Cities can increase their housing stock by building, purchasing, or reclaiming homes. For example, Barcelona’s Right to Housing Plan (2016–2025) foresees the creation of 8,000 new public rental units, most of which are reserved for affordable housing. The city also exercises its right of first refusal to purchase properties before speculators and imposes fines or acquires long-term vacant homes to bring them back into use. In Spain, municipalities are granted legal powers to act against vacant units, while Denmark promotes affordability through a robust non-profit housing sector that now provides homes for nearly one million people across 600,000 units.
Regulating Tourist Rentals
Tourist rentals often reduce housing availability for local residents. Barcelona has taken one of the boldest steps in Europe, announcing the gradual phase-out of all 10,000 tourist-apartment licenses by 2028. London allows short-term lets for a maximum of 90 days per year, while Denmark caps them at 70–100 nights, depending on local authority approval.
Incentivizing Public-Private Partnerships and Cooperative Housing Models
Governments also foster alternatives through subsidies and partnerships. Cities such as Vienna, Paris, and Barcelona have developed hybrid models aimed at providing their populations with subsidized housing while preserving a strong bargaining position for the municipality. The Habitage Metròpolis Barcelona initiative, for example, creates housing on public land in collaboration with private partners under rules that guarantee permanent affordability. In parallel, public–community schemes can be deployed to support cooperatives and foundations in constructing new housing units.
photo: Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0
A notable example is the Spreefeld project in Berlin, initiated by a collective that secured a loan and negotiated with the municipality to purchase a site. The development comprises three new housing blocks, including private apartments and a few cluster flats, where residents have individual rooms with a bathroom and kitchenette while sharing a larger kitchen and living area. Built with on-site energy systems—a cogeneration unit, heat pumps, and photovoltaic panels—the project also offers extensive shared facilities: a communal garden, a sauna heated by residual energy, a woodworking workshop, community rooms (regularly rented for public activities), bicycle parking, and a shipyard connected to the river. In the cooperative, rents and income from the common rooms repay the loan, ensuring stable rents. What began as a grassroots initiative grew into a partnership with the city and financial institutions, demonstrating how public–private cooperation can transform community visions into stable, affordable housing.
architecture: Carpaneto Architekten + Fatkoehl Architekten + BARarchitekten
photo: Klateřina Krebsová
Community-initiated projects take various forms. Mehr als Wohnen in Zurich, for example, is a cooperative of over 1,200 residents, supported by municipal land and financing, and operating at a metropolitan scale. Estonia, meanwhile, is known for its tenant organizations, which manage most privately owned apartment buildings. Backed by state renovation grants and loan guarantees, these organizations focus on collective upkeep and energy efficiency, achieving average savings of up to 40 % in many renovated buildings.
Spatial Planning and Affordable Housing Policy Specialist, Ministry of Regional Development of the Czech Republic
Economist and Social Geographer, Vice-Dean for Research and Doctoral Studies, Faculty of Architecture, Brno University of Technology
A specific example of a community-led housing initiative is the Mietshäuser Syndikat (MHS), founded in Freiburg in 1992. Emerging from Germany’s squatter movement, it established a legal and financial framework to secure self-managed, affordable housing outside the speculative market. The model enables resident collectives to co-purchase buildings, while its legal structure ensures that once acquired, properties can never be resold on the private market and remain dedicated to housing in perpetuity.
Rents cover loan repayments and include small contributions to a solidarity fund, which supports the creation of new projects and sustains the syndicate itself. Today, the MHS connects nearly 170 houses and provides homes for around 4,500 people. Beyond housing, many member projects engage in local politics and advocacy, working to keep non-profit housing recognized within municipal strategies and public tenders.
FURTHER READING
Beyond these nationally rooted networks, broader international collaborations have also emerged. The MOBA Housing Network (2017) connects projects across Central and Eastern Europe, pooling knowledge and solidarity funding. The Commoning Spaces Network (2018) brings together initiatives experimenting with collective ownership and management across borders. Together, these transnational alliances strengthen the community-led housing movement by sharing expertise, fostering financial solidarity, and developing adaptable legal models.
The scalability of such systems is crucial. As the MHS demonstrates, growing membership enhances stability, enables financial solidarity and knowledge exchange, and strengthens adaptive capacity. In this way, networks evolve into resilient, community-based alternatives to global market structures.
MOVIE TIP
(Sdílené domy)
In the Czech Republic, a housing initiative inspired by the German Mietshäuser Syndikat was founded in 2017. Formally registered as a civic association under the name Shared Houses, it now serves as an umbrella organization for social cooperatives that can collectively acquire and manage homes. The legal framework guarantees that once acquired, properties cannot be resold on the private market and will always serve a housing purpose.
Shared Houses developed a financial structure based on the principles of the Mietshäuser Syndikat. It rests on three pillars:
Member contributions:small, returnable deposits made upon joining the cooperative.
Direct loans:voluntary loans provided by members and supporters, often interest-free or with low rates.
Bank loans: external financing for property acquisition, usually the largest portion of the budget (60–75% in the MHS model).
The First Swallow was the first social cooperative within the Shared Houses network to purchase a property, doing so in 2021. The group, currently comprising ten adults and four children, acquired a former inn located in Prague’s wider city center—a 19th-century building that had previously served as a cinema or a guesthouse.
Teacher; Member of Shared Houses
MORE INFO ON THE FIRST SWALLOW COOPERATIVE:
https://prvnivlastovka.cz/en/o-projektu-english/
Architect, Second Nature Studio; Member of the Sustainability Working Group, Czech Chamber of Architects; co-author of The First Swallow renovation project