Search

In context of diminishing housing affordability, shared renting has acquired new salience in recent years, especially for single young-adults. Public discourses often pose shared renting as a potential solution to the 'housing crisis', with new regulation and investment stimulating conversions to multiple-occupancy and growth in co-living developments. This paper addresses how Amsterdam, a deeply regulated market, has approached affordability concerns through transformations in the shared rental sector. Drawing on secondary data and stakeholder interviews we analyze developments in the institutional features of shared housing, focusing on the regulatory context under neo-liberal pressures. We identify shifts from 'traditional', relatively informalized sharing arrangements towards a more complex and institutionalized sector featuring growth and diversification in co-living provision. Beyond illustrating interaction between changing real-estate investment practices and Amsterdam's socioeconomic and regulatory context, our analysis innovates a rough typology of sharing and co-living and seeks to contribute to understanding of emerging forms of housing and precarity characteristic to the experiences of young urbanites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article develops the concept of housing ideology in order to analyze the rise of co-living. Housing ideology refers to the dominant ideas and knowledge about housing that are used to justify and legitimize the housing system and its place within the broader political economy. Co-living is the term for privately operated, for-profit multiple occupancy rental housing. The article argues that the rise of co-living is supported by four key ideological elements—corporate futurism, technocratic urbanism, market populism and curated collectivism—which serve to legitimize co-living within the housing system and enable its profitability. The ideology of co-living appears to critique many elements of the contemporary urban housing system. But despite its critical self-image, co-living does not represent an alternative to today's financialized urbanization. Ultimately, the article argues for the importance of understanding the role of housing ideologies in residential change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Co-living is commonly considered as an arrangement for rental housing. However, co-living in housing estates by sharing common amenities among co-owners has been practiced for many years in high-density cities. Yet, there have been very few empirical studies on the estate premium and the economies/diseconomies of scale effect on house prices, probably due to the lack of data. This study is a novel attempt to examine the economies/diseconomies of scale effect using the hedonic price model to estimate the impact of the number of housing units in a housing estate on house prices, ceteris paribus, using Hong Kong housing transaction data. The results confirm the hypothesis of estate premium and the economies of scale effect of co-living in housing estates. Economies of scale are observed, with larger estates commanding a premium of up to 5031 units, beyond which the effect declines, hinting at potential diseconomies. Building age moderates this effect, as we observe a larger scale effect in especially younger estates with lower maintenance costs. Additional tests confirm the positive correlation between amenities and prices, with an optimal amenity number enhancing prices, while excess amenities lead to diminishing returns. A case study reinforces these findings, demonstrating a general trend of decreasing management fees with increasing estate size, supporting the notion of economies of scale. Overall, this study contributes valuable insights for developers and homebuyers, emphasizing the importance of balancing estate size and amenities for cost-sharing advantages and effective management in co-living housing estates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Co-living was commonly considered inferior compared to single)family occupied homes. However, with the chic of sharing economy and the sophistication of online peer-to-peer accommodation platforms, co-living has become more common and popular nowadays. Yet, there have been very few empirical studies on the co-living discount in rents and the economies of scale benefit to landlords, probably due to the lack of data. This study is a novel attempt to examine the disutility of co-living and the economies of scale effect by using hedonic price model to estimate the impacts of the number of co-living flatmates on total rents, ceteris paribus, in the New Zealand housing markets. The results confirm the hypothesis of non-linear economies of scale benefit of co-living to the landlords. There is a 17.3% substantial fall in rents between 0 and 1 flatmate, but a gradual marginal increase in total rents from 2 flatmates onwards. This study also provides comprehensive results on other key determinants of co-living rents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]