The conference on “Working and living: The challenge of affordable housing”, organised by AFB, in cooperation with EZA and funded by the European Union was held on 29 and 30 May 2025 in Brixen, Italy. Over 70 representatives of workers’ organisations from South Tyrol (Italy), Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, and Belgium attended the conference.
Focusing on one of Europe’s most pressing challenges, the event brought together housing experts, as well as representatives from politics, trade unions, and social organisations, to examine the state of housing markets in different countries, the evolution of housing policies, and the broader social implications of the crisis. Institutions such as the European Parliament (2021), the European Commission (2023), and national housing ministers (Declaration of Liège, 2024) have placed the housing shortage—and its impact on employment, quality of life, and social cohesion—at the forefront of political debate. Data on housing demand show that not only low-income individuals, but also working households and self-employed members of the middle class, are increasingly unable to afford home ownership due to rising prices. When more than 40% of a household’s income goes towards rent, covering basic living costs becomes a serious challenge.
The conference identified three key challenges that call for modern, forward-thinking solutions. The first is understanding the nature of housing needs, which—according to experts—are increasingly diverse. Family and household sizes are steadily shrinking, and housing options must reflect the different requirements people have at various stages of life, as well as shifts in their income levels. A person’s place of work and working patterns are also key variables: for example, seasonal workers in the hospitality sector often live on-site, as do many care workers. In several industries, a hybrid model is emerging, combining daily or weekly commuting with occasional remote work. Living near one’s job generates different needs than commuting into metropolitan areas, where most manufacturing and service companies are based. Young people’s career paths are increasingly marked by job changes and greater mobility compared to previous generations. This shift calls for more flexible housing solutions—above all, an increased supply of affordable rental housing.
New housing models, such as co-housing and intergenerational living, are injecting new dynamism into the housing market. By moving beyond the traditional focus on young families, these approaches respond to the growing number of single-person households. Additional initiatives are needed to help older adults downsize from larger homes to more manageable ones, while also addressing their increasing care needs. The recent revival of interest in building worker accommodation is, at best, a short-term response to immediate demand. In many cases, companies themselves are taking the lead in providing housing for employees. Yet often overlooked is the fact that labour migrants in stable employment are typically seeking long-term housing solutions—particularly to support family reunification.
The second major issue is the profound shift in housing demand. The momentum that once drove residential construction in the final decades of the 20th century has largely faded. Faced with a shortage of domestic labour, strong economies have increasingly turned to workers from non-EU countries, especially from Africa and Asia, profoundly changing the social makeup of those in need of housing. People coming from regions with lower living standards and incomes, seeking work or simply a secure future, often have a stronger legal entitlement to housing support compared to local residents. The situation has been exacerbated by a large influx of refugees and asylum seekers who need accommodation and must be integrated into inclusion programmes. While some political actors ignore these realities, others are increasingly hesitant to pursue socially oriented housing policies, fearing the potential for social tensions. Public intervention tends to focus on minor adjustments, such as updating urban planning rules or modifying subsidy schemes, without exerting real influence over housing market dynamics. When concrete measures are introduced, they often target politically ‘safe’ groups like the middle class, using eligibility criteria that many disadvantaged individuals cannot meet—or the initiatives are postponed indefinitely.
Another point of tension lies in the uneasy balance between trusting the housing market to self-regulate and actively steering public housing policy. In a stagnant housing market—marked by a shortage of rental units, inflated prices, and competition from foreign property buyers—the status quo tends to prevail unless there is targeted intervention in key market dynamics. In such a scenario, market logic continues to dominate: when supply stagnates or shrinks and demand expands, prices remain high, while profit margins for developers, speculators, and investors continue to grow. Rent subsidies are therefore an essential tool to ensure affordable housing for low-income groups, though they carry the risk of further fuelling the price spiral.
Experiences across different countries show that the private housing market does not see providing affordable housing—especially for low-wage earners or the unemployed—as its responsibility. Instead, it is individual market actors, and above all public institutions and non-profit organisations, that step in to fill this gap. It is a key responsibility of policymakers to reinforce the mandate and resources of such entities, which prioritise the common good over private profit. These actors include municipalities, publicly funded developers, private foundations, and housing cooperatives. With the right incentives, private capital could also be steered towards ‘social investment’ in housing, accepting lower returns in exchange for positive social outcomes. As showcased at the conference, non-profit developers can deliver more cost-effective housing solutions through careful planning, agreed quality standards, and advanced building techniques. In collaboration with local governments, they can negotiate more favourable terms for both rental and ownership. Cooperative housing models with undivided ownership also offer promising ways to ensure long-term non-profit control of housing. In these arrangements, ownership of the dwelling remains with the cooperative if tenants terminate their contracts, keeping the units available for future residents in need.
A key objective must be to ensure that newly built housing remains permanently tied to the non-profit sector. This would guarantee that a significant portion of the housing stock remains available to meet the needs of lower-income and middle-income households, under the stewardship of public bodies and non-profit developers. They also need support to sustainably renovate existing buildings and transition to environmentally friendly heating and cooling systems. The cost of such innovations often exceeds what typical earners can afford. Publicly funded programmes to promote energy-neutral new construction and upgrade existing housing for energy efficiency need significantly more momentum. A further challenge is posed by speculative price increases, which distort the market. For this reason, public oversight and coordination are essential to ensure affordability and social equity.