Associative Governance in Nordic Housing

*Please note that this article addresses trends that to some extent apply across Norden, but it is mainly concerned with the Scandinavian countries of Denmark, Norway and Sweden.

Historical context: Corporatism in non-profit housing

During the period from 1946 to 1985, and in spite of important regional differences, Nordic housing systems were to a large extent characterized by municipally driven corporatism. Central to this model was the coordination between local authorities and umbrella organizations representing tenants, homeowners, and other housing stakeholders. This system enabled collective action through voluntary associations and ensured a balance between top-down regulation and bottom-up participation and organization. Municipal housing agencies, tenants' unions, and housing cooperatives all played a vital role in organizing and distributing affordable, high-quality homes, fostering social integration, and ensuring political legitimacy through democratic involvement.

This corporatist infrastructure was, in many ways, a key to the success of housing in all of the Nordic countries: Associative governance - grounded in participation and community organizing - enabled collective bargaining, the protection of tenants' rights, and the distribution of subsidies. An extensive body of academic literature has demonstrated that this approach ensured that housing to a large degree was seen as a social and common good rather than purely or primarily a commodity (see for example Sørvoll & Bengtsson, 2020). Sweden’s rent regulation was achieved through tenants’ unions, while Denmark’s cooperative housing organizations reflected a system built on collective action (see Jørgensen, 2019, for more on this). The corporatist approach throughout much of the twentieth century meant that all significant stakeholders in housing bought in to the idea of negotiated compromises.

'Arbejdernes Andels-Boligforening 1920' (The Workers Cooperative Housing Association) in Copenhagen. Photo: Copenhagen Archives (Edvard Griegs Gade), Public Domain.

The erosion of corporatist housing governance

From the mid-1980s onward, housing regimes across the Nordic region have been transformed by pressure from increasingly neoliberal policies, which have promoted market-driven solutions and processes of financialization. Center-right governments in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden reduced housing subsidies and moved towards market-based incentives, leading to significant changes. In their article on co-operative housing in Sweden and Norway from 2018, Sørvoll & Bengtsson note that this shift was part of a broader trend toward deregulation and marketization, where housing was increasingly viewed as a market commodity rather than a common good.

As government support for housing corporatism declined, housing associations faced difficulties maintaining their role as mediators of organized housing interests. Mortgaging systems, once cooperative, were transformed into corporate lenders integrated in the private banking sector, which favored existing homeowners over first-time buyers. This process of “financialization” redistributed wealth toward older, well-established homeowners while leaving younger generations with fewer affordable housing options. Processes of neoliberal transformation particularly disadvantaged marginalized groups, including foreign-born residents with limited social capital, who became increasingly concentrated in segregated suburban areas.

Associative governance in Nordic housing: Challenges and opportunities

In 2018, a plan was agreed to restructure public housing areas dramatically when Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussem led a coalition government made up of The Liberal Party (Venstre), Liberal Alliance, and the Conservative Party (Det Konservative Folkeparti). Photo: Wikimedia (CC BY 4.0).

Despite the overriding trend for marketization, associative governance structures in housing seem prima facie to have shown signs of resilience in the Nordic countries, although they have been increasingly challenged. Accordingly, most of the Nordic populations still live and participate in owner-occupied housing cooperatives or non-profit rental governance, with for-profit rentals remaining largely outside this regime. Umbrella organizations have continued to seek political representation for members to ensure that tenants and homeowners have a voice in managing housing resources – although the extent of their success remains unclear and warrants further research.

There are additionally signs that groups who do not feel sufficiently represented increasingly organize themselves on a grassroots level. For example, in the 2010s in Denmark, housing enclaves of disadvantaged citizens were labelled “parallel societies” and were contrasted against the ideal of areas with a mix of dwellings and social classes. This paved the way for regulative measures based on a political agreement entitled Ét Danmark uden parallelsamfund – Ingen ghettoer i 2030 (Denmark without parallel societies - No ghettos by 2030), which led to the homes of more than 10,000 residents being either demolished or sold off as private property. This has spurred protests and community organizing in Denmark under the banner of Almen Modstand (or “common resistance”), a network of action groups demonstrating and employing human rights litigation to challenge discrimination in the housing field. Grassroots organizing of this kind appears to be the result of residents in common housing facilities preferring direct action rather than seeking representation through existing housing organizations.

So, financial power and market logics increasingly dominate, challenging and to some extent undermining the negotiated compromises and public regulation that once defined Nordic housing governance (Kemeny, 2006). The pressures of neoliberalism have to some extent strained the traditional corporatist framework, and tensions within housing associations have led to frictions, factions, and frustrations, particularly as economic inequalities become more pronounced and evident in urban housing markets.

The ability of umbrella organizations to maintain their role in managing housing conflicts depends on their capacity to adapt. Historically, grassroots initiatives and novel forms of collective action and organizing have provided a counterbalance to market forces. As the Nordic housing model becomes more market-oriented, the potential for civic and associational governance to reclaim a role in housing provision will depend on new forms of organizational revitalization and collaboration, community organizing, and grassroots mobilization.

The Nordic housing model today

Processes of bottom-up associating and community organizing and top-down incorporation continue to offer a flexible and relatively enduring approach to Nordic housing governance. As Binderkrantz & Christiansen (2015) describe it, corporatist systems now operate as “privileged pluralism” - a framework in which bodies with publicly recognized interests negotiate with government actors, but increasingly on market terms rather than through the previous corporatist channels and structures.

The future of this system is uncertain and ambiguous. As public authorities in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway grapple with the realities of a commodified housing market and changing social and organizational landscapes, the important role of umbrella organizations in housing governance may evolve. Of particular importance is their ability to maintain a pivotal place in managing housing conflicts, representing their members’ interests and their role in critical decision-making structures. Such an approach will help to counteract the power of globalized financial markets and neoliberal policies which otherwise render collective organizing an increasingly marginal force. While associative governance seems to remain an essential part of the Nordic housing system, balancing market pressures with the longstanding tradition of cooperative, inclusive housing is imperative if housing is to become a solid - rather than a “wobbly” - pillar of the Nordic welfare states.

This article is based on new insights and those from the book Associative Governance in Scandinavia: Organizing Societies by “Combining Together” edited by the authors and H. Byrkjeflot, particularly the chapter on 'Governing people's homes: Organizing housing associatively in Scandinavia', also by the authors.

Links:

The Danish Government's plan to eliminate ghettos from 2018 (Ét Danmark uden parallelsamfund – Ingen ghettoer i 2030)