International Social Housing Festival

NAHRO’s International Research and Global Exchange (IRGE) Committee Goes to Europe

In June 2025, about twenty NAHRO members and staff traveled to Dublin, Ireland for the fifth biennial International Social Housing Festival (ISHF). The ISHF is an initiative of Housing Europe, the European Federation of Public, Cooperative and Social Housing.  Housing Europe members and allies span across 31 countries, and encompass 25 million dwellings—or 11% of the housing stock in the European Union. The previous four ISHFs were held in Amsterdam, Lyon, Helsinki, and Barcelona.

This year’s ISHF consisted of more than 300 learning sessions and more than 30 site visits and housing tours in Dublin. The Republic of Ireland is an amazing country with a rich history. They were the perfect hosts to share their efforts in the provision of affordable housing and created a fantastic learning and sharing venue at the beautiful Dublin Convention Centre.

Comparing Social Housing in Europe and the U.S.

In Europe, “social housing” is a term generally defined as housing that is less expensive and is typically funded or assisted by local or national forms of government. Social housing plays a crucial role in providing affordable living spaces for low-income individuals and families. However, the approach to the provision of social housing varies significantly between Europe and the U.S. due to differences in government policies, funding models, and societal attitudes toward public housing.

Government Involvement and Funding

In Europe, social housing is often heavily subsidized by the government, with many countries maintaining large-scale public housing programs. Nations such as the United Kingdom, Germany, and France have long histories of state-funded housing projects designed to provide stable, affordable homes for a broad range of income groups^[1]. By contrast, the U.S. relies more on private-sector involvement, with federal programs such as Section 8 housing offering rental assistance rather than direct government-owned housing^[2]. In the U.S., while public housing has a significant role in housing the poor, no new units have been authorized since the early 1990s.

Architectural and Urban Planning Approaches

European social housing tends to integrate with existing urban environments, emphasizing sustainability and community development. Many projects focus on mixed-income housing to prevent social segregation and ensure long-term viability^[3]. In the U.S., public housing developments have historically been concentrated in specific areas, sometimes leading to economic and social isolation¹.

Irish Social Housing

In Ireland, housing is a human right. It is guaranteed by its national government by providing financial assistance through a similar mechanism to the U.S.’s Section 8 housing assistance payment. There are obvious rules and regulations on who qualifies to receive them, but assistance is provided once a private unit is identified.

Social housing assistance in Ireland is immediate and universal. Any family or individual is guaranteed financial assistance towards a rental house as long as they meet the low-income threshold. However, a qualifying individual or family must find an available unit from a private landlord. For some families, several of whom we met on housing tours at ISHF, there is a preference to live in social housing that is built through governmental help, which is mostly provided for life. Residents of these social housing developments pay rental rates based on their income, in which affordability is a factor.

European Social Housing

Both the European and U.S. affordable housing models share some similarities .

In both Europe and the U.S., affordable housing rental rates are based on a percentage of the tenant’s income. In Europe, rent is often set as a percentage of the tenant’s monthly earnings. In the U.S., rent is capped at 30% of a tenant’s income. Unsurprisingly, the affordability of rents on either percentage model remains to be an ongoing issue of public policy.

In both areas, long wait lists and limited housing stocks impede access to affordable housing—making the wait for placement in an affordable (or social) housing scenarios years-long.^[4]

Historically, government finances the creation of actual housing units permanently set aside for the lower income population. Most European governments invest in low-income housing by constructing units or providing substantial equity to non-profit providers to do the same. In most cases, the contract to create new units comes with a long-term, ongoing subsidy towards operating cost.

On the other hand, a key difference lies in how housing shortages and crises are addressed. In Europe, governments tend to implement broad policy measures aimed at increasing housing stock and stabilizing rents. For instance, rent control policies are widely used in cities like Berlin to limit rising costs that could otherwise push low-income people out of urban areas. By contrast, the United States often focuses on tax incentives and subsidies aimed at encouraging private developers to address housing shortages, but these measures can sometimes fall short of meeting the needs of low-income individuals and families on a large scale.

Another area of difference emerges in how cultural attitudes toward social housing shape its implementation. In Europe, social housing is often viewed as an essential public service akin to healthcare or education, which fosters a broad societal acceptance. In the United States, however, public housing has historically been stigmatized, with some communities associating it with poverty or crime, which can hinder efforts to expand and improve these programs.

As we explore these similarities and differences, it becomes evident that each approach carries unique strengths and challenges. While Europe’s more centralized systems aim for equity, they struggle with bureaucratic inefficiencies. Conversely, the decentralized American model promotes innovation but often grapples with accessibility for those in need.

Financial Markets and Housing

Another striking similarity between the U.S. and Europe is how financial events such as the 2008 mortgage crisis impacted both sides of the Atlantic. Just as U.S. entities stopped building housing inventory and thus created an even greater shortage of new housing stock, so did Europe. And similarly, Europe has yet to catch up with that shortage and experienced increased costs. Financial markets today are global with the majority of cash being provided by the global north and distributed across the world. Crucially, when the American Federal Reserve increases interest rates to control inflation, Europe has to follow America. European banks cannot offer lower interest rates to attract investors as this disrupts the global financial market and its leader, the United States of America.

Further divergence relating to the cost of material and construction products

When countries produce goods, they are hardly producing for their own citizens alone anymore. To benefit from economies of scale, they are producing more, becoming experts in the production of certain goods, and exporting them to the rest of the world. This is particularly and naturally more apparent in Europe and North America, plus other more successful producers of manufactured products, such as China and Japan. This further explained the housing crisis in Europe and how we are experiencing the same dilemma in the U.S. What happens in the world financially impacts housing and homes.

What I learned from our European housing friends solidified that our housing provision and economies are similar. And how different and less affluent parts of the world have higher numbers of unhoused and underhoused populations—places such as Africa, South America, and other developing regions of the world.

I also expanded my housing perspective while commiserating with friends from different parts of the world. We have 16,000 people living rough in Puget Sound (Washington State). Ireland has 15,000, with comparable populations of 4.4 and 5.3 million respectively, while Gaza as of January had 1.9 million homeless people. Perspective is everything.

[1] https://nonstandardhouse.com/social-housing-in-the-uk-and-us-evolution-issues-and-prospects/

[2] https://yieldinvesting.co.uk/social-housing-in-the-uk-vs-us/

[3] https://www.archdaily.com/932075/comparing-social-housing-in-countries-around-the-world

[4] https://nonstandardhouse.com/social-housing-in-the-uk-and-us-evolution-issues-and-prospects/