Soaring housing costs across Europe are creating a political vacuum that far-right parties are eagerly filling, according to new research from leading political scientists. The crisis, marked by property prices and rents surging far beyond income growth, has become a central campaign issue for nationalist groups who offer a simple, exclusionary solution: housing for nationals only.
The Political Battle for Affordable Homes
While progressive parties have largely neglected housing or offered technocratic 'build, build, build' solutions, radical right parties like the Netherlands' Freedom party (PVV) and Portugal's Chega have seized the agenda. Former German chancellor Olaf Scholz's pledge to construct 400,000 new homes annually fell drastically short, highlighting the limitations of a supply-only approach that fails to address affordability for ordinary Europeans.
Research from the Progressive Politics Research Network, involving professors from the University of Oxford, Central European University, and the University of Zurich, identifies a fundamental divide in how housing is perceived: as a financial asset versus a social right. For decades, the 'asset' paradigm has dominated, encouraging policies that treat homes as investments. This has led to deregulated markets, reduced social housing, and structures that inflate prices, eroding the concept of housing as a basic right.
Blueprint for a Progressive Housing Agenda
The researchers propose a three-pronged strategy for progressive parties to reclaim the housing debate. First, they must reinvest in social housing, but with a modern twist. The model of the 1970s, targeted only at the poorest, risks stigmatisation and lacks broad political support. Instead, they point to Vienna, where around 40% of households live in limited-profit or public housing. This wide access, combined with strong tenant protections, builds the cross-class coalitions needed for sustained investment.
Second, policy must address both supply and distribution. The fixation on new construction misses a critical issue: under-occupation now rivals overcrowding in many European countries. In Germany, housing inequality is linked more to age than income, with younger households and immigrants facing severe overcrowding while older households live in under-occupied homes. Policy must incentivise redistributing existing space alongside building new units.
Building Broad Coalitions for Change
Third, increasing density is unavoidable but must be done correctly. Large-scale surveys show public acceptance hinges on design. When projects include participatory governance, protect green space, and ensure affordability, resistance plummets. Densification without social inclusion is destined to fail politically.
This ambitious agenda requires substantial public investment, which can be funded through popular mechanisms like net wealth taxes and reformed capital gains taxes, especially when revenues are transparently linked to affordable housing. Austria demonstrates how dedicated housing funds, supported by modest levies, can sustain large-scale provision.
Progressive parties must also strategically leverage private investment by tying planning permission and public loans to conditions that ensure profits are reinvested and social and ecological criteria are met. The researchers conclude that the far right's narrative—blaming immigrants for scarcity—will continue to gain traction unless the centre-left offers a bold alternative that treats housing as a fundamental question of distribution and social rights, not merely a construction target.
