Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR)
This study highlights the increasing importance of "common good" in housing policy amidst tight markets and affordable housing shortages. It explores the role of foundations as housing market players, emphasizing their long-term commitment and unique business models. The report identifies key findings regarding foundations' contributions to housing for vulnerable populations, alternative financing, and the emergence of community-driven models, suggesting a need for further development and collaboration in this sector.
2019
1.2 Summary The term “common good” is gaining in importance generally once more within the debate on housing policy. This is taking place on the background of the increasingly tight housing markets and the lack of affordable housing in many cities and regions with corresponding social impacts. There are also supply bottlenecks on the regular housing market for people with care needs or disabilities. In addition, the residential requirements are becoming more differentiated: There is a growing demand for communal living, the combination of living and working or even forms of living with social or cultural requests. On the one hand, new players and offers in the public welfare or non-profit sector are thus gaining increasing attention; on the other hand, interest is once again directed towards foundations as players. The commitment of these two groups was where this research project placed the main emphasis. One focus of this study was to gain insights into foundations as housing market players and to show what characterises them with regard to organisational forms, target groups in demand of housing and to „business models“. As regards other players with their sights on the common good, important framework conditions and typical project constellations were identified on the basis of an analysis of umbrella organisations, house groups, project types and cooperations. Since there are already current studies on the “classic” municipal housing companies and housing cooperatives, these were not considered in depth here deliberately; however, they play an important role as cooperation partners or as young housing cooperatives in the context of the case studies. In addition, players and house projects from other European countries were included in order to study different foundation and financing models, as well as community land trusts. This report gives a structured overview of the relevant market participants, representative projects of foundations and other public interest players and their relevance for housing policy. Potentials and recommendations for the housing Einleitung 13 policy at the federal, regional and local government levels are derived from the analysis of the framework conditions and instruments. In summary, the following key findings should be highlighted: • Non-profit foundations cannot pursue solely the purpose of providing housing, as this is not recognised as non-profit objective under tax law. Nonetheless, foundations play a remarkable role on the housing market in two segments: firstly, in the provision of housing for people with care needs (senior citizens, people with disabilities) – this applies in particular to foundations with a history going back centuries. On the other hand, some young foundations stand out as buyers of real estate that is to be withdrawn from the speculative housing market for the long term. • Foundations pursue different “business models” with regard to the utilisation or management of real estate in order to fulfil the purpose of the foundation. Foundations that acquire housing stock in the sense of “mission investing” are still rather rare. • The special feature of foundations is their longterm commitment to a specific purpose, which guarantees independence from current housing policy trends. Foundations are thus predestined to secure lasting land use for the common good. • The syndicate of tenement houses (“Mietshäuser Syndikat”) also offers a sustainable legal framework in the format of a limited liability company opposed to the sale of residential property. The model is now known throughout Germany, the spread of projects has increased and is being used by house groups both for the purchase of existing buildings and for new construction. Some syndicate housing projects cooperate with land foundations. • In quantitative terms, the segment of foundations and other players in the housing market oriented towards the common good has so far been of little relevance to the housing market. The house projects and players, however, achieve an effect in the neighbourhoods through the provision of rooms and networking opportunities as well as the organisation of events. Their contribution also consists in the further development of common forms of housing, alternative financing models (crowdfunding, funds), legal and organisational forms (tenement housing syndicate) and strategic cooperation (foundations with housing cooperatives or tenement housing syndicate). • With the allocation of urban land concepts, various municipalities are already using a steering instrument to promote a housing policy oriented towards the common good. The specifications contained in the concept tenders for cooperation with social institutions, quotas for apartments with occupancy commitment, etc. lead to a certain convergence of offers from the players examined and other providers such as established housing cooperatives, municipal housing companies and others. • A further similarity in the direction and choice of instruments can be seen between municipalities and land foundations. Some municipalities are considering setting up municipal foundations or supporting the establishment of community foundations. Moreover, and partly in connection with this, the instrument of hereditary building rights is experiencing a certain renaissance. Some municipalities are increasingly allocating land under heritable building rights, others are examining such steps. • The City of Zurich with its “Stiftung zur Erhaltung von preisgünstigen Wohn- und Gewerberäumen der Stadt Zürich” (PWG Foundation for the Preservation of Low-cost Residential and Commercial Spaces of the City of Zurich) is a special example. The city provided endowment capital and supports the foundation annually from budget funds. Similarly, in London and Brussels, community land trusts are funded by the municipality through grants or plots of land. • The study of players and projects in Italy shows that the public housing sector has benefited from the establishment of a foundation created by a bank. The funds were used to carry out a pilot project in Milan for a form of social housing construction and to strengthen networking at a national level. • The examples from London and Milan show – certainly also due to their size – a professional process support and community building (Community-Led-Development und Community-Organising) that has not been found in Germany before. Overall, there is both a broad spectrum of ap - proaches and a tendency towards convergence of organisational models and financial instruments. Although there are already exchanges and project cooperation between some players, there is still much room for greater dissemination of experience, further development of the models and sustainable, long-term safeguarding of the orientation towards the common good.