Building a Better City:
Europe’s Affordable Housing Standard
 
Shelterforce Online, January/February 2004
By Hunter L. Johnson

 
In the United States, nonprofit builders of affordable housing often compete against each other as well as against larger, better-capitalized private builders for limited low-income tax credits and other scarce sources of low-cost financing. Because of this stiff competition, it’s not uncommon for needed and economically viable projects to be left on the drawing board. Even if money is available, nonprofits frequently must jury-rig financing from several different public and private sources. Financing packages to build affordable housing can be extremely time consuming and enormously complex.

 
Such is not the case in Europe, where affordable housing is dominated by nonprofit housing associations; few private builders are involved. Consequently, a sense of solidarity and cooperation has resulted among the nonprofit builders. This has led, in turn, to financing affordable housing projects by nonprofits in Europe that is much simpler, faster and more efficient than in the U.S.

 
I recently was part of a group of U.S. affordable housing officials, sponsored by the Housing Partnership Network, that saw first-hand the strides that the United Kingdom and the Netherlands and the have made in providing quality affordable housing. In both countries, affordable housing is a top public priority, and local and national governments have a well-articulated affordable housing strategy. Unlike California and many other parts of our nation where the lack of affordable housing is a continuing crisis, low-cost housing in the U.K. and Netherlands is available to people who need it, when they need it. Both countries have long histories of development and ownership of affordable housing through nonprofit housing associations dating back to the Industrial Revolution. Early housing associations were rooted in labor and church groups, although today’s organizations are non-sectarian and no longer affiliated with labor or interest groups.   Continue »

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Return to Index