Renovating on Unequal Premises: A Normative Framework for a Just Renovation Wave in Swedish Multifamily Housing

While the energy transition of the EU housing stock is now being intensified with the launch of the Renovation Wave, economic inequalities are increasing in many OECD countries, which has effects on housing-related inequalities and the demand of affordable housing. The Renovation Wave is thus an opportunity to improve housing quality for low-income households, but also entails risks for increased rents. In Sweden, the standard of housing is relatively high and energy poverty in multifamily housing is rare, meaning that there are limited social benefits to be achieved from extensive energy retrofitting; moreover, Sweden lacks a social housing sector, which limits protection of the worst-off residents. This paper thus explores whether the limited social benefits of the Renovation Wave weigh up against the risks that it entails for the worst-off in the Swedish context. This is done within a normative framework for just energy transitioning that is developed within the context of the Renovation Wave and increasing economic inequalities, consisting of four ordered principles: (1) The equal treatment principle; (2) The priority principle; (3) The efficiency principle; and (4) The principle of procedural fairness. Analysis showed that to be considered just according to our framework, the Swedish energy transition of housing should, in contradistinction to what is suggested in the Renovation Wave, limit the imposition of extensive energy retrofitting in low-income areas. Finally, having identified a mismatch between the most effective approaches in terms of energy savings and the most acceptable approaches in terms of social justice, we offer policy recommendations on how to bridge this mismatch in a Swedish context.

The Evolution of Multifamily Housing: Post-Second World War Large Housing Estates versus Post-Socialist Multifamily Housing Types in Slovenia

The academic discourse on post-Second World War (post-WW2) multifamily housing complexes has mostly focused on their negative aspects, related, especially, to their high population densities, poor quality of construction and social problems, due to the dominance of low-income residents. In reaction to these and other negative characteristics, alternative multifamily housing types started to emerge, first in Western European countries in the 1970s, and later in Eastern European countries, following the adoption of the market economy system at the beginning of the 1990s. The transformation that has occurred in mass housing types has been particularly distinct in Eastern European countries. Motivated by the lack of focused analyses of the important characteristics of these transformations, this article adopts a rare approach to the mass housing debate by focusing on examining the merits of post-WW2 large housing estates as compared to those of the post-socialist era. With a focus on Slovenia as a case study, a comparative analysis is performed by conducting a detailed review of the literature and other relevant sources. The comparative analysis shows that post-socialist multifamily housing types have many advantages over the post-WW2 housing estates, a finding that leads us to deduce that the transformations in mass housing typologies that have occurred in Slovenia (and other Eastern European countries) may have serious implications on the future of large housing estates. It is thus suggested in the conclusion that suitable regeneration policies need to be urgently implemented in post-WW2 housing estates in order to create more attractive living environments and prevent the potential degradation of these neighborhoods, which would, in turn, result in spatial residential segregation with concentrations of low-income households in post-WW2 housing estates.

The Impact of U.S. Housing Type and Residential Living Situations on Mental Health during COVID-19

Residential environments could be associated with the mental health of residents, in general, and during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, limited studies have investigated the relationship between these two. This study used data from the Household Pulse Survey, collected between 23 April 2020 and 23 November 2020 to explore the relationship between mental health status as perceived by the residents and housing tenure (own or rent), building type, and the number of household members, while accounting for sociodemographic characteristics, general health-related variables, and week-specific unobserved heterogeneities. The findings suggest that renters had higher odds of experiencing mental health issues than homeowners. Residents in multifamily housing units had higher odds of experiencing mental health problems than single-family units. Further, more people in the household were associated with lower odds of experiencing mental health episodes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Sliding Scale between Usufruct and Ownership: The Example of Swedish Multi-Family Housing

This paper aims to elucidate the sliding scale between usufruct and ownership by applying a property rights framework to three Swedish forms of tenure in multifamily housing. The framework deconstructs the bundles of rights of rental, tenant-ownership and ownership to highlight commonalities and differences connected to the right to use and exclude, the right to transfer and the right to the value. It is concluded that the three tenure forms have many traits in common but that there are distinct differences in some areas, most notably in connection to the right to the value. The property rights framework applied in the study may be applicable also on a general level as a method to analyze and compare tenures of different types in different countries. Further, ways to improve the framework and cover more facets of outcomes of property rights patterns are suggested.

Jurisdictional Size and Residential Development: Are Large-Scale Local Governments More Receptive to Multifamily Housing?

In the United States, particularly in high-cost urban areas, local resistance to multifamily housing development has been widely noted. In many metropolitan areas, legal authority over land-use regulation is assigned to jurisdictions that often are very small, and some scholars argue that this small-scale local control institutionalizes neighborhood-level opposition to new construction. Using census tracts as units of analysis, we assess the relationship between the population size of the city, county, or township that regulates a tract’s land use and the change in multifamily units between two recent waves of the American Community Survey (2008–2012 and 2014–2018). Results of regression analysis indicate that larger jurisdictional population size is indeed associated with increased multifamily construction. However, the relationship applies only for jurisdictions with populations exceeding 100,000 and decays at jurisdictional populations of more than 1 million. This nonlinearity may reflect quasi-monopolistic land-use control in the largest jurisdictions.

Sustainability of post-socialist urban design treatment of public open spaces in multi-family housing areas: Case study of Nis, Serbia

This research focuses on the treatment of public open spaces (POS) in multifamily housing areas in post-socialist Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. The aim is to evaluate their quality and sustainability and to identify all important impact factors influencing their properties. A case study was conducted on a representative sample of four multi-family housing sites in Nis, Serbia. Determining the interconnection between urban planning parameters and the realized quality of POS is one of the primary objectives that could lead to forming recommendations for future multi-family housing development, including more usable and sustainable POS in the current social and economic context. The models for improvement of POS quality and sustainability are defined as a research result.