Special committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union Ordinary meeting - Joint with IMCO Committee
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
HOUS European Parliament
Follow its sittingsIrene Tinagli
Thank you. Thank you Stefan. Now we start with our first panel which focuses on one fundamental question: how do construction materials affect housing affordability and housing supply across the European Union? So we will hear from key representatives of the European construction sector and experts working on sustainable building solutions and housing delivery. Discussions will address material costs, supply chain resilience, innovation and market conditions shaping the sector's capacity to deliver affordable and sustainable housing.
So now we have all the speakers that will have six minutes for their presentation and I first give the floor to the representative of Knauf Group, Mr. Christoph Dorn, CEO of two Knauf Group entities, Sakret and Knauf Performance Materials.
Christoph Dorn
Thank you.
Honorable members of the European Parliament, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this timely discussion. I speak today from the perspective of a manufacturer of construction materials and systems. Knauf is a European family-owned and independent company with a strong footprint across Europe and one of the world's leading manufacturers in the sector. As a manufacturer of construction materials and systems, we sit at the intersection of housing, industrial competitiveness, energy, and climate policy. By producing locally for local markets, we help strengthen supply resilience, support housing delivery, accelerate renovation, and contribute to Europe's energy and climate objectives.
We are all here today because the EU is facing a housing crisis. Across Europe, housing markets continue to face a structural imbalance between supply and demand. Housing costs have risen sharply. To meet demand, Europe needs around 650,000 additional homes each year. At the same time, the renovation rate must double to deliver enough affordable, resilient, and energy-efficient housing.
From our perspective, five factors are particularly important to the sector's ability to deliver housing at the scale, speed, and cost Europe now requires. First, material costs are a direct constraint on housing delivery and energy is a major driver of those costs. Many essential construction materials rely on energy-intensive production and recent geopolitical tensions, including the conflict in the Middle East, have intensified pressure on energy prices. As energy prices rise, manufacturing costs increase, making both new build and renovation projects more expensive. This is why industrial energy policy must be part of the broader housing response.
Alongside measures to protect consumers, manufacturers need access to reliable, affordable energy and timely grid connections to continue decarbonizing production. Energy-intensive industries are already investing in this transition, but they need a stable long-term framework and continued support. Second, access to raw materials is fundamental to supply chain resilience. Increasing housing supply requires secure access to the raw material needed to manufacture construction products in Europe. For essential materials such as gypsum, long-term access is critical.
Opening a new gypsum quarry typically takes at least 10 years and is often further delayed by lengthy permitting procedures. A more consistent EU approach to raw materials is therefore needed, one that recognizes the strategic importance of construction inputs for housing delivery and enables faster, more predictable permitting for essential domestic raw materials. Third, scaling up housing delivery requires a stable and predictable legislative framework. The housing crisis can't be solved through new build alone. Renovation must be a central part of the response, especially as 85 to 95 percent of today's buildings will still be standing in 2050 and around 70 percent of them need upgrading.
This is why implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive is so important. It is a key tool for decarbonizing Europe's building stock while helping to expand the affecting housing supply. Fourth, Europe should support faster and more efficient construction methods. If Europe wants to deliver more homes in less time, it must make greater use of innovative construction methods. Prefabrication and modular construction can shorten delivery times and ease pressure on an already stretched workforce.
Lightweight vertical extension can also create new homes without additional land take. At the same time, meeting Europe's housing and renovation objectives will require all construction materials. Legislation should therefore remain material neutral, avoiding distortions in competition and unnecessary cost increase while supporting innovation, affordability and the rapid delivery of both renovation and new housing. Fifth, Europe should create the right framework for circular construction. Circularity is not only an environmental objective.
It can also support housing affordability and supply by reducing reliance on virgin raw materials and strengthening resilience. Demolition and renovation generate large volume of recoverable material which, if reused or recycled effectively, can become part of the supply solution. But circularity will only scale if the economic and regulatory conditions make it viable. Today disposal often remains cheaper than recycling. The key message is simple: Europe can't solve its housing crisis unless the construction sector can build at the scale, speed and cost required.
That means putting in place the right conditions for the construction value chain to deliver. Housing policy and industrial policy are closely linked. If Europe wants more affordable, sustainable and resilient homes, it must ensure that its construction ecosystem is strong, capable of delivering them. Thank you.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Mr. Piero Petrucco, the Vice-President of ANCE. Thank you.
Piero Petrucco
Thank you, President, honorable members. ANCE represents 20,000 construction companies in Italy, the vast majority of which are small and medium-sized enterprises. What I would like to share today comes from the direct experience with the regulatory framework, the labor market and the challenge of adopting new technologies in a sector that is changing. The success of a major plan for affordable housing also depends on a series of factors ranging from the adaptation of regulatory conditions to the digitalization of processes from the planning and permitting phase through to design. Improving productivity, which is unfortunately still inadequate, will be essential through the introduction of new materials and construction methods as well as the definition of appropriate financial instruments.
We must be able to transform our sector. What will be fundamental is the ability to foster innovation in a world that remains strongly tied to the traditional models. Innovation in production processes and their industrialization, new materials and the progressive digitalization of all stages of the process, from planning to design and the subsequent management of the built environment through the introduction of BIM, Building Information Modeling, as well as the development of sensor and IoT.
All this makes it possible to redefine the way the construction industry works. We are experiencing a true technological transformation. Innovative materials such as self-healing concrete, ultra-high performance and CO2-free geopolymers, advanced composites, and high-performance insulation systems already make it possible to reduce maintenance costs, increase the durability of structures, and combine energy efficiency, carbon emission reduction, and seismic safety. More sustainable and efficient materials can make an important contribution to reducing construction and management costs, the latter being an increasingly important issue. But for this to happen, it's important to strengthen the entire construction material supply chain, ensuring adequate conditions for the companies that produce, distribute, and use these materials on construction sites.
In this regard, the construction sector welcomes the European Commission proposal on the Industrial Accelerator Act because it can represent an important driver for strengthening Europe's industrial base and creating lead markets for European low-carbon industrial products. For construction, this is particularly relevant because the sector is closely connected with energy-intensive industries such as steel, cement, aluminum, and construction products more broadly. At the same time, it's important that this framework remain consistent with the Construction Products Regulation. We therefore welcome the fact that the green label envisaged by the Industrial Accelerator Act is legally compatible with the CPR. Standards and definitions relating to construction products must be developed within the framework of the CPR and not through instruments designed for other sectors.
Otherwise, the risk is to create overlaps, uncertainty, and additional costs, especially for the SMEs that, as we all know, represent 95% of the companies of our sector. The challenge we face is that the regulatory framework, both European and national, must keep pace with this innovation. Authorization procedures for new materials and new products must be optimized in order to reduce costs, especially for SMEs. For example, if components are produced using additive manufacturing, since they are not currently covered by the Eurocodes, they must undergo certification procedures by national technical assessment bodies, which are too slow and for this reason incompatible with market needs. We need faster authorization pathways that ensure sustainability and safety without sacrificing speed.
We also ask for maximum freedom in the technological choice of the solution adopted, leaving the market to play its role. It would be useful to introduce a single rating system for assessing the various technologies, defining benchmarks for time, cost, and sustainability. We hope for the introduction of public support mechanisms similar to those used for renewable energies to accompany companies in the initial phase of adopting new technologies, when costs are higher and risk greater. In the broader context of reducing process costs, alongside the introduction of new materials, there is the issue of off-site construction and modular construction. It's not the solution for every problem, but it certainly brings significant improvements to construction processes in terms of costs, delivery times, productivity, safety, and sustainability.
However, it's important to ensure a European supply chain for off-site production, a sector that is currently dominated by producers from third countries.
To this end, it would be very important to identify suitable investment lines to support the scalability of the process. It's also necessary to promote a framework of multi-year stability for intervention that make the necessary but very substantial investments possible. The European affordable housing plan can represent a unique opportunity in this regard. Thanks.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you, thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Mrs. Linda Hildebrand, Directorate Q, former professor at RWTH Aachen University. Just as a reminder, if you all can speak slowly to allow for the interpretation and I think when this the microphone starts flashing it means you need to slow down a little bit. So thank you very much. Yes, Mrs. Hildebrand and I think she is online.
Linda Hildebrand
Yes, I am. Good morning. Um, yes. Good morning and ich spreche auf Deutsch. Guten Morgen und vielen Dank für die Einladung, ich freue mich heute meine Perspektive auf die Wohn- auf die Frage der nachhaltigen Wohnraumentwicklung mit Ihnen zu teilen.
Wie bauen wir Wohn- und Arbeitsstätten, die im Einklang mit der Natur sind, fragte der Archi- fragte der amerikanische Architekt und Autor James Wines schon in den 70er Jahren. Heute ist die Frage aktueller denn je. Der Bausektor trägt erheblich zum Ressourcenverbrauch, zu Treibhausgasemissionen und zur Flächeninanspruchnahme bei. Mit jeder Baumaßnahme entscheiden wir darüber, wie wir die Bedürfnisse der Gegenwart mit den Anforderungen zukünftiger Generationen in Einklang bringen und wie wir uns zu den globalen Auswirkungen verhalten. Die zentrale Herausforderung besteht darin, ausreichend Wohnraum zu schaffen, der zugleich ökologisch verantwortbar, sozial gerecht und wirtschaftlich tragfähig ist.
Vor diesem Hintergrund hat sich das Umweltprogramm der Vereinten Nationen verschiedene Zukunftsszenarien ent- entwickelt. Der beschriebene Transformationspfad setzt auf zwei wesentliche Prinzipien: den verstärkten Einsatz erneuerbarer Rohstoffe und die möglichst lange Nutzung bestehender Gebäude und Bauteile. Zur Schaffung von Wohnraum werden vor allem drei Strategien diskutiert und umgesetzt: Neubau, Sanierung und Umnutzung. Gleichzeitig gewinnen zirkuläre und biobasierte Materialien zunehmend an Bedeutung in im Hinblick auf die ökologische Qualität hier auf der X-Achse und Bezahlbarkeit auf der Y werde ich diese auf diese Aspekte eingehen. Aus ökologischer Sicht ist die Weiterverwendung bestehender Gebäude häufig die wirkungsvollste Strategie.
Bei Umnutzung reichen oft oftmals vergleichsweise geringe Eingriffe aus, um Gebäude an neue Anforderungen anzupassen. Dabei bleiben große Teile der vorhandenen Bausubstanz erhalten und der Bedarf an neue Ressourcen sinkt deutlich. Gleichzeitig zeigt sich, dass die gesellschaftlichen Vorteile aus nutzenden Sicht zwar besonders hoch sind, aber häufig die wirtschaftlichen Anreize für Eigentümerinnen und Investorinnen ausbleiben. Die Folge ist, dass viele geeignete Gebäude nicht aktiviert werden.
Auch Aufstockung bietet die Möglichkeit, zusätzlichen Wohnraum zu schaffen, ohne neue Flächen in Anspruch zu nehmen. Bestehende Infrastruktur kann weiter genutzt werden und die Eingriffe in die Natur und Landschaft bleiben begrenzt. Obwohl die fachlichen Grundlagen gut untersucht sind, wird diese Baumaßnahme bislang nur in einem vergleichsweise geringen Umfang eingesetzt. Bei Sanierung stellt sich zunehmend die Frage, mit welchen Materialien und Verfahren bestehende Gebäude ertüchtigt werden. Hier gewinnen zirkuläre Ansätze an Bedeutung.
Die Wiederverwendung und Ertüchtigung von Bauteilen reduziert den Bedarf an Primärrohstoffen und stärkt regionale Wertschöpfungsketten. Gleichzeitig entstehen neue Kooperationen zwischen Planung, Handwerk und Industrie. Es zeigt sich bereits in verschiedenen Bereichen der Bauwirtschaft. So arbeiten Glasverarbeiter an Lösungen, bei denen Fensterglas möglichst lange genutzt wird, anstatt es nach dem Ausbau zu zerstören und einzuschmelzen. Das zeigt, dass Kreislaufwirtschaft nicht nur ressourcenschonend, sondern auch wichtige Innovationsimpulse für die Branche setzt.
Ergänzend dazu eröffnen biobasierte Baustoffe Anwendungsmöglichkeiten für einen ressourcenschonenden Gebäudebestand und können einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Reduktion von Emissionen leisten. Dämmsysteme auf Lehmputzbasis werden zunächst im Denkmalschutz angewandt und sind mittlerweile auch in anderen Bereichen verbreitet. In der Entwicklung befinden sich eine Reihe von Systemen, die auf Gräsern basieren. Das bietet die Chance, die Nutzung der Anbauflächen als Emissionssenke und Rohstoffquelle zusammen zu entwickeln. Auch im Neubau können wiederverwendete Bauteile den Verbrauch von Rohstoffen und die damit verbundene Emission deutlich reduzieren.
Für viele Produktgruppen entstehen heute bereits marktfähige und teilweise kostenneutrale Lösungen zur Verfügung. Um ihr Potenzial auszuschöpfen, benötigt es neue Prozesse und dafür Unterstützung in der Transformation. Es braucht mehr Anreize, diese Projekte in die Breite zu bringen. Holzbau etabliert sich zunehmend im mehrgeschossigen Wohnungsbau und wird durch industrielle Systemlösungen wirtschaftlich attraktiver. Andere Produkte wie etwa Dämmstoffe aus Gras oder regional verfügbaren Pflanzenfasern sind bislang noch Nischenlösungen, zeigen jedoch das Potenzial einer stärkeren biobasierten Bauwirtschaft.
Produkte mit guten ökologischen Qualitäten brauchen Vorfahrt in Zulassungsverfahren und Unterstützung beim Markteintritt. Bis hierhin zeigt sich: Viele geeignete Lösungen sind bereits verfügbar. Ihrer Umsetzung stehen jedoch häufig systemische Anreize entgegen. Das aktuelle Wirtschaftssystem fördert den Profit einzelner, die durch die Kosten vieler getragen werden. Es entsteht ein kurzfristiger Nutzen für wenige, der langfristigen und werterhaltenden Lösungen entgegensteht.
Die sozialen und ökologischen Auswirkungen bleiben außerhalb des Resonanzbereichs von Projekten. Das führt zu falschen Anreizen. Es gibt oft, oh Entschuldigung, die Slides sind nicht mitgekommen, oh Mist. Ich bin auf der vorletzten Seite. Diese müssen zusammen, ökonomische Mechanismen greifen nicht.
Auf abstrakter Ebene lässt sich feststellen, dass die Aspekte ökologisch und ökonomisch, sozial wie im Drei-Säulen-Modell visualisiert separat diskutiert werden.
Diese müssen zusammen entwickelt werden. Konkret bedeutet das, dass zum Beispiel Wohnungsbau auch mit Waldumbau, Bestand mit Umweltkosten zusammen betrachtet werden müssen, so dass sozialverträgliche ökologische Lösungen in die Breite kommen. Es braucht stärkere Anreizsysteme, um die Ressourcen- und Emissions- und Wohnungswende zusammen zu entwickeln. Leerstand in urbanen Räumen bietet ein schnell zu erschließendes Potenzial. Dazu braucht es die rechtlichen Vorgaben, gemeinnütziges Bauen muss eine größere Rolle spielen, denn so kann der langfristige Werterhalt von Wohngebäuden gesichert werden.
Zirkuläre und biobasierte Lösungen brauchen eine stärkere Integration durch Quoten, Vereinfachung und Verfahren. Wir brauchen weitere Projekte zur Sicherheit und Stärkung, um neue Wertschöpfungsketten regional in die Versorgung unserer Rohstoffe, um unabhängig zu stärken. Vielen Dank für die Aufmerksamkeit.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for these presentations. Now I give the floor to the members, followed by reply by experts. So we start with the questions and answer and I start by giving the floor to Borja Giménez Larraz for the EPP.
Borja Giménez Larraz
Muchas gracias, presidente y muchísimas gracias también a todos los expertos. Yo creo que hoy todos somos conscientes de que en la Unión Europea vive una crisis clara de oferta, 10 millones de viviendas se hablan, ¿no?, para cubrir la demanda actual. Y detrás de esta falta de oferta son muchos los motivos. Es una crisis pues con carácter claramente multifactorial. Hablamos de excesiva burocracia, de regulación muy compleja, de los largos permisos, de la falta de suelo finalista, de la falta de financiación, de la falta de mano de obra o de el incremento de los precios de la energía y de los materiales, que ese es el tema que hoy nos ocupa.
Mi primer mensaje y fundamentalmente es para la Comisión Europea. Llevamos en los últimos años pues lleva centrando todos sus esfuerzos económicos y de inversión en mejorar la eficiencia energética de los edificios. Una causa, un objetivo que creo que es completamente noble, necesario, nadie lo quiere poner en duda, pero quizá la situación actual debería también hacernos replantear, ¿no?, que la Unión Europea tiene que dedicar esfuerzos a invertir en innovación, en mejorar la productividad en la construcción de los edificios. Es decir, que sea más rápido, que los materiales puedan ser más baratos y creo que la Unión Europea tiene que hacer esfuerzos para redefinir y reenfocar muchos de los recursos que está enfocando hoy pues en otras cuestiones. Yo creo que es una cuestión prioritaria.
Y luego a los expertos me gustaría decirles, la Unión Europea sabemos que hoy la Comisión está inmersa en un proceso de auditoría de la legislación para detectar pues cuál puede ser o cuál puede estar imponiendo algunas requisitos excesivos o excesivas regulación. Mi pregunta es cuando hablamos de los materiales, ¿ustedes tienen detectadas algunas propuestas, algunos reglamentos, algunas directivas concretas específicas que estén afectando de forma negativa el coste de los materiales? Eso es todo. Gracias.
Stefan Lehner
Thanks a lot for that question. So indeed, we need to have that deep look at simplification of what can be to some extent maybe inefficient ways of doing things across the whole range of issues, which is regulatory, but also finance, access to finance, how we can develop a better understanding together what needs to be done, what are the needs and how to serve them, how to increase the user-friendliness basically of the entire system. So there we fully agree.
And that the aim should be reduce costs, speed up and develop a clear understanding of the quality needed for a particular purpose in order to have the appropriate response, the appropriate solutions for citizens because in the end it's for the citizens. So for that we need to need to have a close look and deep look at the various, as you said, complex issues. There's no easy solution but I think there are lots of contributions from individual measures which can together improve and the situation and reduce costs, speed up and help deliver. Thank you.
Just if I can.
Yes, Mr. Petrocco.
Piero Petrucco
I say that I also said before but for example the story of the Eurocodes. If it's not preview inside the Eurocodes the use of one new material, it takes a lot of time to have the possibility to use it in a project, so in in the design phase. So I think that this is an example of what could be important in order to accelerate the process and accelerate in the way in which if we have a new material you can use it at least at the experimental for the first phase at experimental level. But it's important to have this opportunity because otherwise if it takes too long time the solution is that no one of us will use it because it's not feasible.
Christoph Dorn
Ja, ich glaube das Thema Baugesetzgebung, die sehr heterogen in Europa ist, ist ein ein ein großes Thema und auf der anderen Seite die Förderung von modernen Bauverfahren, Leichtbauweise, Vorfertigung wird schon ein Schlüssel sein, um insbesondere im Affordable-Bereich Lösungen, günstige Lösungen zu schaffen.
Irene Tinagli
Yes, thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Isabelle Kalinowski for the EPP.
Isabelle Le Callennec
Oui, merci Madame la Présidente. On sait que dans le prix final d'un bien immobilier, le coût des matériaux pèse lourd. Or, pour favoriser le logement abordable, compte tenu du pouvoir d'achat de nos concitoyens, il nous faut tenter de baisser les coûts de construction. Je dis tenter parce que ça fait des années qu'on le dit et malheureusement on voit plutôt les coûts augmenter. Alors merci beaucoup à nos panélistes pour leurs recommandations que personnellement je partage et notamment l'appel à une stabilité des règles et à la simplification.
Certaines de vos propositions relèvent de l'Union européenne et d'autres des États membres. On le dit dans cette commission spéciale, la compétence logement est d'abord une compétence des États membres mais les règles imposées parfois par l'Union européenne pèsent également. J'aurais deux séries de questions. Aux représentants de Knauf et de l'ANCE, quels sont les principaux freins au développement de la construction modulaire et de la construction hors-site ? Et quels sont les principaux freins au recyclage des matériaux ?
Vous avez dit que ça coûtait parfois plus cher. Au représentant de la Task Force, où en sont les États membres dans la transposition de la directive EPBD sur la performance énergétique ? Normalement transposable depuis quelques jours, ça devrait être terminé parce que ça fait deux ans. Et observez-vous des difficultés à la mettre en œuvre dans certains États membres ? Quel est le calendrier du Construction Act qu'on nous a annoncé ?
Et avez-vous commencé à faire la liste des simplifications nécessaires, c'était dans notre rapport parlementaire, et des besoins en financement, tel que ça vient d'être rappelé, avec les acteurs comme ceux que nous venons d'entendre ce matin ?
Merci beaucoup.
Stefan Lehner
Thank you very much. On the on the last questions, indeed, the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, I think there's intensive work going on now with all the Member States on the national building renovation plans, where the Commission issues recommendations and then Member States are kindly requested to to improve as much as they can the national approaches, the national framework for renovations. As you said, indeed, the transposition is now being in full in full swing. So it's always a huge challenge for Member States to implement fully a directive from the European level, not only on paper, but also in practice. And I think this is what we are working on in a very constructive manner, not me personally anymore, but my colleagues in my in my former unit.
So I think it's it's very important to develop practical exchanges of practices and and and have a common understanding what needs to be done, what reduces costs as much as possible also for the implementation while delivering on the legally required policy objectives of of saving energy in a cost-optimal manner. Because I think I can only stress that the methodology under the EPBD is cost-optimality, at least in the long term, so to make sure that we have the right balance between energy savings, the energy sources, including low carbon, renewable energy, but also nuclear energy, of course, in the sources, the grids, to have an energy system which serves the building stock. On your other questions, the Affordable Housing Act, indeed, we are trying to come forward with that as quickly as possible in the second half of the year. We have, and many of you know, there's a tentative date for for early July. Nothing is certain in this world.
We have to see how we deliver, but our objective is to deliver that. And then it would be, of course, for the European Parliament and for the Council to take it forward in the ordinary legislative procedure. There the scope is, as you know, to make sure that the internal market in relation to services and capital works as clearly as possible for everyone, for the local authorities in particular when they need to take decisions on finding the right balance on non-primary use of of housing. The simplification package, as you mentioned, is on track. We are intensively working on the mapping exercise to see really what is housing relevant in terms of provisions, to get deep and constructive, well, comprehensive input from Member States and stakeholders to have at least a clear understanding what is relevant.
And then in the second step, how do we improve that? How do we move forward? And as you said, there's the European dimension, but also the national dimension, national meaning also at regional, local level, so that we see what actually would need to be improved, simplified, and and and therefore allowing for for more speed in delivery at what level. So I think it's it's a learning, a mutual learning exercise also. It's not it's not usually there are even several levels to be looked at at the same time.
Some rules are really European, others are national put on top, and others are national independent from European rules.
So I think this is the task here which we need to follow. And on finance, your last point, we are building up the pan-European investment platform, I would say as a hub to bring together the various sources of financing, the institutions providing financing, also European and national and sub-national levels, but also the private sector. And in particular to see how we can better use financial instruments because the volumes from public sources alone will by far not be sufficient, so need to be enhanced by significant contributions from the private sector by reducing risks and attracting notably long-term investors which are happy also with lower yields because there's lower risk. Otherwise we won't make it from the financing side. Thank you very much.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. I don't know if Mr. Doran and Mr. wants to add something.
Christoph Dorn
Ja, wenn ich das Thema energetische Sanierung des Gebäudebestands anspreche, dann gibt es Beispiele aus den Märkten in Europa, zum Beispiel Deutschland, wo die Entwicklung in die falsche Richtung geht. Die Sanierungsquote, ich hatte eben gesagt ein Prozent, in Deutschland liegt die bei 0,7 Prozent und ist durch die Turbulenzen des Heizungsgesetzes in den letzten Jahren sehr stark geschwächt worden. Und ein ähnliches Beispiel gibt es auch aus Frankreich, wo die Umrüstung auf Wärmepumpen durch den niedrigen Atomstrom auch die energetische Sanierung des Gebäudebestands ins Hintertreffen fallen lässt.
Piero Petrucco
Mr. Patrucco.
Two things relating to the EPBD, in Italy we have a very bad situation because till now was not presented the plan, we have an infringement procedure, so it's not a very nice situation now. Regarding the off-site, as I said before, I think that what is really important to start is to have a multi-year investment plan because it needs a lot of investment at the beginning. And if we want to have a strong industry that can invest as much as money as needed, we need to have a long-term investment plan. And for this reason, I think that affordable housing, also through this instrument we will push in that direction, could be a great opportunity because otherwise I think it's very, very difficult to be competitive to the third countries, especially in this moment with the Chinese. One idea could be to think about some, let's call prefab valleys, based in a couple of places in Europe in order to have the critical mass that is absolutely needed to make this investment possible.
Regarding what also the Commission said, I fully and we fully agree with the need of new instruments because we need to find a way to activate the private sector, to involve private funds, and to make it possible. For sure we need to do something related with the guarantees for the developers.
Related to the guarantees for the developers, maybe it could help if we try to find a way to modify the Basel III rules that require significant provision now in the construction sector. Maybe we can focus on the affordable housing and do specific provision for those kind of investments. Or from the other side, to involve the private investors, try to provide guarantees on the equity shares for the affordable housing operations. So we need to exercise, I think, our fantasy in order to think more than one instrument. We need to have different boxes in order to try to find a way to involve the private funds.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, thank you very much. Now I have several other requests. Maybe I can group the questions because otherwise we will not have time for the second panel. So now I give the floor to Mr. Flanagan for the Left.
Luke Ming Flanagan
Thank you very much and very interesting information that you're bringing to us. And I think it's really important. I'm representing the Left, but I suppose I also primarily try and represent my country, Ireland. And we are looking for solutions to a massive housing crisis. We have 17 and a half thousand people who are living in emergency accommodation.
5,600 of those are children whose lives are completely and utterly on hold. I raised three children myself and I tell you, it's hard enough with plenty of money and a good house. But I don't know what it's like if you're moving from one form of emergency accommodation to another. And your ideas about existing buildings make total sense because we've a massive amount of them empty in Ireland. And I would say in fairness to our government, they have actually put in place schemes, maybe a little complicated at times, but they are moving well in that area.
Modular homes, recycling materials, all excellent. But while I am horrified at the housing crisis, I am also very worried about what deregulation might mean. And I want to see houses built and built well as quickly as possible. But my worry is that when our biggest boom in housing came in Ireland was during 2000 to 2008, when we had massive deregulation. And you could say, there you go, deregulation is great.
But with that deregulation and in the meantime, a lack of market surveillance, massive lack of market surveillance, we now have a big problem. And there are infringement proceedings against Ireland in relation to deleterious materials, concrete materials in people's houses. And what I want to know is, is there not, do you not think there is a danger and while we need, I'll say it again, we need to build houses, is there not a danger that with deregulation, while you might build them today, they may fall down not tomorrow, but 10 or 15 years' time? Because we are facing 20,000 houses in a small country like with five and a half million people living in the southern part of the island. We're looking at 20,000 houses.
Suicidal. Some people dead because they can't deal with the stress on this and their house is falling down around their ears. This is what they're building their houses with and it's crumbling. So I'll say it again, I want the houses built, but I'd like to see them built well. So, and this is a question to the Commission as well.
We're looking at billions in costs.
With de- with deregulation and with simplification, what are we going to do to make sure that that doesn't lead to the current situation that we have in Ireland? Because that's where we are at the moment. And I want to thank the European Commission for continuing to have an infringement proceedings against Ireland. Mightn't be popular, but I tell you it's the right thing to do.
Volker Schnurbusch
Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a difficult name. Normally I speak in English, but we have two German guests, so I may switch to German if I may. Thank you. Vielen Dank an die Referenten, es war sehr aufschlussreich.
Tut mir leid, dass ich mich verspätet habe. Ich habe erstmal, ich hoffe Frau Dr. Hildebrand ist uns noch zugeschaltet und hört uns zu, weil ich möchte dafür danken, dass sie noch mal das Thema Recycling, also Wiederverwendung aufgebracht hat von Baustoffen. Und da treffen sich ja Industrie und Forschung, sage ich jetzt mal, und Ökologie, weil wir haben ja einen massiven Anfall von Materialien, die wir gut wiederverwenden könnten im Baubereich. Kunststoff, aber eben auch vor allen Dingen Zement. Und der landet heute leider nur im Straßenbau oder auf der Halde.
Und das ist einfach ein Jammer, dass wir da nicht mehr tun können. Und ich weiß es aus meinem Bundesland Schleswig-Holstein, dass wir dort, dass wir dort eben Baustoffe importieren müssen aus ganz Europa, weil wir eben so wenig recyceln können, dürfen, weil die Politik uns das verbietet, weil Rezyklate einfach zu hohe Hürden haben. Und da würde ich mich freuen, wenn Frau Dr. Hildebrand und auch Herr Horn vielleicht sagen könnten, was ihre Erwartungen sind, um Rezyklate mehr einzusetzen. Das ist ökologisch und ökonomisch sinnvoll. Und dann noch eine spezielle Frage auch an die Industrie.
Wir haben diese Woche viel über ETS gesprochen, Emissionshandelssystem. Natürlich betrifft das energieintensive Bereiche wie Zementherstellung. Also Heidelberg und Holcim haben ja schon CCS jetzt eingeführt. Ich weiß nicht, ob das für Sie auch ein Thema ist bei Knauf, was Sie von CCS halten und ob Sie Erwartungen an das ETS haben. Und die letzte Frage wäre noch mal, das habe ich nur so halb mitbekommen, das könnten wir auch separat besprechen.
Sie haben auch erwähnt, dass der Gipsabbau sehr schwierig sei. Das wäre mir jetzt neu, weil ich dachte Gips ist nicht so das ganz große Problem, aber vielleicht können Sie das auch noch mal kurz ausführen. Vielen Dank.
Christoph Dorn
Ja, gerne. Zur ETS-Frage, die die Produktion von Dämmstoffen ist ist ETS, aber Gipsprodukte nicht. Sehr unterschiedlich und muss entsprechend dann in in den Betrachtungen der Werke berücksichtigt werden. Das Thema Recycling, dort ist es so, dass Sie wissen, in Deutschland sehr unterschiedlich gehandhabt wird. Wir haben viel zu viele Möglichkeiten für Landfill, kaum Kosten zum Teil.
In Österreich zum Beispiel gibt es ein Verbot für zum Beispiel Gipsprodukte auf Deponien zu verbringen. Und dort gibt es auch klare Regulierungen, wie der Recyclingprozess von Gipsstoffen auch bezogen auf Grenzwerte geregelt ist. In Deutschland fehlt das noch. Trotzdem investiert die Industrie, aber das entstehende Volumen ist ein Bruchteil von dem, was an Bedarf besteht. Bezogen auf Ihre letzte Frage, so ist nicht nur beim Gips, sondern auch Kies, Sand im generell ein großes Problem bezogen auf die Genehmigungsverfahren.
Not in my backyard, Sie kennen das Thema und sehr unterschiedliche Umsetzungsgeschwindigkeit in den einzelnen Ländern und Kreisen.
Piero Petrucco
Yes, very shortly. Two things related to the how to increase the use of recycled materials. I think it's very important that at the beginning public procurement have a role on this because we need to introduce incentives, for example, in the way in points in a public tender because otherwise I think it's difficult to start because actually normally the private market thinks that the secondary material are as lower quality than the new one. It's quite normal this. We need to start with the habit that it's the normal the normal situation.
Just a very short answer to the Irish MEPs. I think that simplification doesn't mean deregulation. Are two different concept. We need simplification. I agree that we have to pay attention of what we are deregulating, but are not completely linked the two.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, I will also ask Mrs. Hildebrand and I apologize with her because she wanted to intervene in the previous question, but I didn't see the request for the floor.
Linda Hildebrand
Yes, that's that's fine. Thank you. I wanted to comment that the issue that have been addressed for recycling are also true for reuse. So we also need some sort of simplification in the process although we have a technical suitability, it's often an administrative and regulatory hurdle to integrate that in new construction. So this is also something where we need simpler simpler rules to order in order to make it more interesting.
And my second point is that we with all this affordability, which is really the core of it, we really need to bring incentives with the with the pressure being fast. We need to have incentives that also consider environmental issues as well. And we need to need to stop the fast demolishing of houses because I think that is an potential that we also need to exploit better. Thank you.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. I don't know if the Commission wants to add something on also on the Irish situation because indeed we were there like two weeks ago or less. Last week, actually, you know, and we also had the opportunity to exchange views with the university professor that showed us exactly this problem of literally houses falling apart. I've never seen anything like that, like the concrete that just yes, that just falls down in pieces and the houses destroyed for construction problems.
Stefan Lehner
I think it's a it's a huge challenge across all member states. It's certainly not limited to Ireland, but it's also there as everywhere else. I think what you said and I can only underline what Mr. Petrocco said, simplification is not deregulation.
So those calling for simplification having in mind let's just deregulate, get rid of the rules, we are not there to do that. And that's why we need to have that deep look and have a kind of large convergent of of of thinking on that and build also a clear consensus what actually will be an improvement in terms of efficiency of faster delivery, of reduced costs in in in delivering while ensuring quality and sustainability. Quality meaning also safety, health, stability, long-term value for society and acceptance, identity, the New European Bauhaus principles. And I think quality issues as you have described them of of materials not holding for long enough or only an unacceptably short periods, this is a problem which I think will be addressed and has to be addressed through proper market surveillance as you said of of the rules which we have. The benefits of internal market rules is that they are the same rules for 27 member states.
We can only say these rules would exist in each member state in a different way if we hadn't European rules. So having European rules which are efficient, which are accepted, which are properly enforced, reduce costs, simplify the situation enormously for all of us because if we didn't have them, member states would have their own rules and we would have just borders, you couldn't use one material coming from one member state to the next. And I think this is where we reduce costs, but we have to indeed put a lot of focus on market surveillance and making sure that there are no abuses basically of manufacturers, that we have quality on the market which is transparently visible for for for suppliers and and and the project developers and authorities. And I agree also that public procurement is a very good way of increasing, enhancing the market here, create confidence that also recycled materials and reused materials can provide the quality. The important thing is to build trust in the market, so and for that we need market surveillance and also clear communication and transparency of rules and what is done to preserve them.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you. Now the last question, I give the floor to Marion Walsmann for EPP.
Marion Walsmann
Ja, vielen herzlichen Dank, das ist eine hochspannende und wichtige Diskussion. Ich habe folgende Anregung und Fragen auch an die Kommission. Die Wohnraum- und Entwicklungsplanung hat ja viel zu tun mit der Entscheidung zu Wohnformen, Baumaterialien, Quartiergestaltung. Die Initiative New European Bauhaus ist benannt worden. Die soll ja gerade dazu die besten Rezepte aus unseren Mitgliedstaaten nutzbar machen.
Und wie kriegen wir da mehr Geschwindigkeit mit Blick auf verwertbare Best-Practice-Ergebnisse hin? Es gibt aus den Mitgliedstaaten hervorragende Forschung an der Bauhaus-Universität in Weimar zum Beispiel, auch an dem Internationalen Institut für angewandte Baumaterialforschung. Und ich denke mal, dass das nutzbar gemacht werden muss auf der Plattform des New European Bauhaus, damit andere Mitgliedstaaten, andere Länder zugreifen können. Und last letzter Punkt: generationsgerechtes übergreifendes Bauen. Da wo vor 30 Jahren junge Familien eingezogen sind, leben Senioren und es werden in 10 Jahren vielleicht wieder junge Familien.
Das heißt, Bauen und Stadtentwicklung muss atmen und sich auch anpassen den Erfordernissen der Zeit.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, so in this one, if you allow me, I will only give the floor to Stefan Moser so we can close the first panel. Thanks.
Stefan Lehner
Thank you very much. The New European Bauhaus is absolutely crucial as part of the package of December which we presented and I think very much also reflected in the European Parliament's report of March which is part of the, I would say, the collective delivery which we now need to pursue. Exchanging good practices, replicating good examples and what are the success conditions from the Member States is crucial within the European Bauhaus delivery framework but also hand in hand with the Housing Alliance and the construction strategy. I think this is really what we need to do. And as you said, intergenerational aspects, flexibility in using the built environment from the physical side is important.
For that, modular elements can help, but also the ways how we use buildings from simply our social way of interacting, like facilitating, for instance, the combination of the needs of senior citizens in houses which may at that moment be too large with the needs of young people, students, trainees, workers, seasonal workers or nurses who actually come to a city and would like to use and need housing could possibly have a win-win situation, live together and have a low rent but provide some services to the senior citizens. I think this needs to be enhanced. So these kind of, I would say, the innovation is not just on the physical side in terms of construction innovation but also how we use, how we live together and to promote these examples also with facilitation from the local authorities, for instance, local associations who can help adjust people, both senior but also young people and seasonal people who need to move around. So flexibility is absolutely important to avoid that we have unused parts or underused parts of the building stock, which is a shame for our societies.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. I apologize I can't give the floor to any more people because we are already running late. So but I conclude this first panel. I really want to thank all the experts that contributed and joined us and also Mrs. Hildebrand online, of course Mr. Dorn, Mr. Petrucco. And we will continue now with the second panel.
So I...
Maria Grapini
Thank you. Yes, thank you. Sorry, we have only 20 minutes. I hope we will have enough time for the discussion. For second panel, we have three speakers, each speaker six minutes, and it's possible we have time for the catch-the-eye.
Now, first speaker is Mrs. Natalia Zebrowska, Head of Unit Construction, DG GROW, European Commission. Please, six minutes.
Natalia Zebrowska
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, honorable members, for inviting us today to this important discussion. It's really a very timely moment to discuss it. We have prepared a presentation describing our current work both on the policy side and on the legislative side, but in the interest of time and also just to pick up some points we have discussed earlier today, I will focus on the main messages. The team I represent is responsible for the legislative framework, Construction Product Regulation, that is the harmonized European framework providing methods for assessment of construction products. And from that perspective, I would really want to take this possibility to refer to some points made already on the simplification versus the regulation and the need for stability of rules.
Not only to be technology neutral in what we do under the CPR, but also to ensure that there is a harmonized set of rules and principles provided to the Member States to assist them authorities, to assist the market surveillance authorities to make sure there are safe construction products flowing on the market. I think it's very important when we talk about simplification not to mention the regulation as such. I think what we're trying to do is to improve the rules, make sure that they are really easily understandable and that we promote tools that make showing compliance easy. That's why we're looking very much at digitalization in the construction system. The second part of the work we're doing in the construction team is really policy, supporting the construction ecosystem in the transition the sector the ecosystem is undergoing.
We have heard from the industry representatives today about several challenges that the construction industry is facing. We talked about decreased productivity, issues with lack of skilled labor, cost of construction materials, increased inflation, uptake of digitalization that proves to be a challenge a challenge, but also the increasing gap between the supply and demand of housing. This is also something we work on very closely with colleagues in the housing task force with Stefan and his team, and this was also one of the major let's say angles of the work we have done last year where the European strategy on housing construction came out as part of the of the housing package. If I can please ask for the next slide. So the four pillars of the strategy that the that we have put forward is is simplification, making business easier.
What we want to really do and achieve is to accelerate permitting procedure and accelerate permitting procedures and make sure that the uptake of digital solutions both by the industry and the administrations on the national regional level at times make it possible to go through the permitting procedures faster. What we also want to do is to increase possibility and confidence of investing in innovation, scaling up the innovative solutions and creating lead markets that would allow us to really strengthen the competitiveness of the European industry. We also look at access to skills and services across the single market. One of the honorable members already mentioned this morning construction services act on which our services team is working. And last but not least, access to materials.
Volatility of and increased prices of construction materials were also mentioned. So this is really something that is important for us to secure access through resilient supply chains, not only to primary materials, but also building solutions including in the legislative framework that allow better access and better uptake of secondary materials such as recycled or reused materials. On the next slide you will see several workstreams that we're currently working on to implement the strategy. I would just want to focus on the few. I wanted to also mention the work we're doing together with the industry under high level construction forum, which is our governance let's say structure governance network that allows const implementing the strategy in collaboration with the industry.
I'm mentioning that also because just in a couple of days in a few days end of June we are organizing a special meeting of the task force dedicated to offsite construction, one of the lead markets we see for the construction industry that was mentioned several times this morning as well. Why we consider offsite construction so important? What we see from the experiences in the market is that it allows to reduce construction time at around 30 to 50%. It allows to bring the price of housing down. When we look at at French examples it can be even up to 20%.
In Germany we have data about 14% decrease. So this is really something that is very significant and can support addressing the housing issue. Then another workstream that is really important for us and also feeds into the simplification agenda is the work on the residential building permits.
We are currently running a study also to feed into the work on the simplification package that was mentioned. We are working together with the Member State authorities and the stakeholders, both industries, but also representatives of civil society organizations, professions, to really map the issues, identify best practices and make sure we spread them across the Union so that we can improve and facilitate the way the permits are obtained and the speed of it. On the next slide, you will also see the, let's say, set out of digital transformation, if you wish, that we want to see happen in the construction ecosystem. What we are, what we are trying to boost with the measures we propose is the uptake of BIM-based solutions for, especially for digital permitting. We want to make sure that the data on construction products is available and can flow throughout the work on construction, during the construction project, but also afterwards.
So when we come to the demolition stage, we know which products can be or materials... Sorry, conclusion, because I don't have time, six minutes for each. Absolutely. So with this image of digital transformation in mind, I want to maybe just say that we are looking forward to cooperation with the, with the industry to make this transition happen. We see that the challenges are having a serious impact on the situation on the ground, but we also see it as an opportunity to make the construction industry in Europe more competitive and more productive, helping to address the housing problem.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much. And now Mr. Pascal, Construction Products Europe AISBL. Thank you.
Pascal
Thank you very much. Dear members of the European Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, first, thank you very much for the opportunity to participate to this debate. CPE, with 53 member associations, both national and sectoral, is a major representative body for the construction product industries. If we move to the first slide, please. A few words on the CPR.
Let me start first with a clear message: the Construction Product Regulation is not a housing policy tool, but it's a key enabler of the construction's housing ambitions. From the start, CPE members have been very supportive of a robust and efficient CPR. The CPR acts as a common compass for our industry. It regulates access to the EU single market and secures a level playing field. It provides trusted and comparable product information.
It ensures stability and transparency for the entire construction value chain. Ultimately, it enables housing delivery, but it cannot solve the housing crisis in its own. However, for this system to remain credible, we need effective and consistent market surveillance across Member States. If we move to the next slide. So the CPR has been revised and CPE welcomed the revision.
There was a need to improve some aspects in this, in the CPR. Still, as we are now entering a complex transition phase with the revised CPR and given that this implementation will be spread over quite a long period of time, we are facing some challenges. From an industry perspective and especially for SMEs, those challenges will be pretty high. The first one will be the coexistence of multiple systems.
For instance, for environmental data, we still have the coexistence of EPDs for some products, not yet under harmonized standards, while LCA data will be required in digital passports for some other products. There will be a significant increase in data requirements driven by the new standardization mandates. There will be a need for substantial investments from the manufacturers to implement both life cycle data for all their products as well as digital product passports at scale. And we have now a specific concern. It has been just said in the presentation before that prioritization has been given to modular construction and kits, and there we see a big risk of weakening the role and recognition of individual components and their manufacturers if the validation and the CE marking excludes the components from the CE marking and the CE marking moves only at modular or kit level.
It's not just a technical issue. It raises questions also about product responsibility, market surveillance, and ultimately product quality. Next slide, please. We all know that one of our first imperative is to mainstream innovation. It's a collective priority to scale innovation and in particular sustainable innovations across the value chain.
Today, innovation exists. Manufacturers have lots of new products in their portfolio, but adoption rate remains very low. The market is fragmented and quite conservative and there is limited willingness to pay for innovation. To address this, we need predictable and efficient regulation. Innovation depends on the ability to anticipate future rules and invest with confidence.
It depends also on the actual implementation of already existing regulations. We believe that green public procurement is a key driver. It can act as a lead market if it relies on workable and comparable criteria. We believe also that product and technology neutrality is a must-have. There is no single solution for sustainable construction.
We should, and policy makers in particular should avoid picking winners. They should focus on performance-based outcomes and they should enable all industries to deliver diverse solutions. Finally, as we are striving for sustainable innovations, we need to keep having a broad definition of sustainability, not just limited to carbon or recycled content. We need to have adaptability, reuse, water management, resilience, health and well-being also at the core of what sustainable innovation means. Moving to the next slide.
Our second imperative is to mainstream digitalization. Digitalization and digital tools are essential for transparency, for data ownership and global competitiveness of EU industry. The digital product passport, even if it's for the time being still to be more precisely defined, lots of implementing acts and standards are still missing, will be hopefully a key enabler if well implemented. From our perspective, three conditions are critical. The DPP must become the single source of truth when it comes to manufacturers and products data.
We need to avoid duplication of data systems across regulation or across stakeholders. We need also to ensure full interoperability between the DPP, the building digital logbooks and all BIM tools. And we need also to ensure full interoperability between across member states. And we need to clarify roles between at product level with the DPP and at building level with the BIM and building digital logbooks.
Digitalization must simplify the system, it shouldn't create additional fragmentation. To the next slide, please.
Pascal
Yes, it's my conclusion, it's the last slide. So if we look at the cost because it's clearly one of the key concern, clearly today manufacturers are facing a huge increase in costs. And this huge increase, especially in energy prices and supply chain disruption, affects both producers and affordability of housing. We believe that beyond helping manufacturers, and many aspects have been touched by my colleague from Knauf earlier, we need also maybe to think differently and shift from the focus exclusively on upfront cost to a more life cycle cost approach. This will imply better use of more sustainable and durable materials and facilitate alternatives such as circularity.
Thank you.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much. And now Ms. Cinzia Missiroli, CEN-CENELEC. Five minutes.
Cinzia Missiroli
Yes, thank you. Thank you very much for the for the kind invite and I have a few slides to present. Yes, thank you. So we can move to the next one. CEN and CENELEC are two of the officially recognized European standardization organizations.
As you know, we are a membership-based organization with members that goes also beyond the European Union with 34 members in CEN and 34 in CENELEC. And we work whenever possible with our international counterpart ISO and IEC to have one global solution, but this is not the case when it comes to the construction products because we have mainly purely European standards. Next one, please. I would like to clarify that first of all that the role of harmonized standards is to define technical requirements, assessment methods for construction products, which in turns will help contribute to the safety, sustainability and the digitalization and quality of buildings, especially when the standards are represent the state of the art. But we we offer technical solution, but we are certainly not in a position to discuss about prices or commercial aspects.
Next one, please. When it comes to construction products, we have more than 80 technical committees and hundreds and thousand of experts within Europe that develop the relevant standards. There are more than 3,000 standards for construction products, around 400 of which are harmonized standards in support of the Construction Product Regulation. And without harmonized standards, the single market for construction products simply cannot function. Harmonized standards provide common technical language that allows products to be assessed in the same way across all Member States.
And this is what enables the free movement of construction products and avoid fragmentation into national requirements. Of course, standards are developed in an inclusive process and also small and medium enterprises are involved and the small and medium enterprises are also those that are benefiting from the availability of standards because one single solution is applied across the whole entire European Union. Standards provide predictability that create then clarity in testing and requirements and accelerate the innovation and market entry for construction products. Of course, this is also there is the standards support the Member States because you have a common technical business, sorry, technical basis that enable faster scalable housing delivery.
We have next one please. Overall there are challenges when it comes to the development of harmonized standards because we develop harmonized standards following standardization requests but there are more than 30 product family of harmonized standards of for which harmonized standards are required and for which we are still lacking standardization requests and of course this slow down also the entry of new products and the the innovation cycles. There are complex regulatory requests that in turn needs to be translated into technical solutions and that's why we have really close collaboration with the European Commission to move these things forward as fast as possible and thus allowing the introduction of these innovative products in the market. Next one please, I'm very aware of the time so I'm trying to be as fast as possible. We were mentioning before the the CPR and the new elements introduced by the the CPR.
The standards that we are developing of course really wants to support the environmental performance of building and to produce instruments that allow the development of environmental performance for construction products. Something that we are also focusing our efforts on is in the provided guidelines that will ensure that the performance of the declaration of performance and conformity is digitalized and that we not only have a human readable documents but also a machine readable documents. And we are also discussing within the CPR CPR acquis expert groups also with experts to introduce and see how we can again support the introduction of more innovative products. Thank you. Next one, we are not only harmonized standards, we are already also working in many other areas that are supporting the building environment.
Here you see some are relating to the environmental performance. We are also focusing as other colleagues have mentioned about all the activities on Eurocodes and also focusing also on the on the circular on the circular economy and one major project... So sorry, thank you very much because all presentation will be published on the IMCO web page. It's not problem, all presentation will be published of the IMCO web page. Now so sorry because for second panel don't have enough.
It's possible three question very quickly with one minutes for for panelist. We have for MEP of course. Yeah?
Isabelle Le Callennec
Merci beaucoup Madame la Présidente. Deux courtes questions à la représentante de la DG GROW. Vous appelez de vos vœux des règles harmonisées mais sous la forme de recommandations ou d'obligations pour les États membres ? Parce qu'on sait que la réglementation est imposée par la loi, c'est obligatoire, tandis que la norme, il est beaucoup question de norme, est une recommandation technique volontaire. Et sur la compétitivité, pensez-vous que les entreprises du bâtiment pourront émarger au chapitre compétitivité du cadre financier pluriannuel ?
Et si oui, sur quelle ligne ? Merci.
Luke Ming Flanagan
At this is for DG GROW. The market surveillance regulation, it very clearly states that it needs to be done on a proactive basis rather than a reactive basis. Do the Commission themselves actually have the resources to be proactive rather than reactive because if it wasn't for the Petitions Committee this would never really have come to light and it's brilliant there was an avenue in but it seems like a very cumbersome way to deliver the message to the Commission. So is there any way to make the Commission more proactive rather than reactive? And I accept the problem is in my country, believe me.
Pablo Arias Echeverría
Thank you very much, chair. I'm going to speak in Spanish. En IMCO debatimos con frecuencia sobre las barreras que aún persisten en el mercado único, siendo la fragmentación normativa una de las más relevantes. Aunque los permisos y licencias de la construcción son principalmente competencia de los Estados miembros y de las autoridades regionales y locales, las diferencias entre procedimientos pueden generar retrasos y cargas administrativas que dificultan aumentar la oferta de vivienda. ¿Cómo valora la Comisión este problema y qué papel puede desempeñar la Unión Europea para fomentar procedimientos más eficientes, especialmente en el contexto de la futura Construction Services Act?
Asimismo, la escasez de mano de obra cualificada es otro de los grandes retos que aumenta la capacidad de la construcción en Europa. ¿Qué medidas está considerando la Comisión para facilitar el reconocimiento de cualificaciones y la movilidad de trabajadores del sector, garantizando que estas barreras no limiten la respuesta europea a la actual crisis de vivienda? Muchas gracias.
Maria Grapini
Thank you for interpreter. Thank you, five minutes please for answer DG GROW. Thank you very much.
Natalia Zebrowska
Thanks, chair, and many thanks to all the honorable members for the questions. I'll try to take them one by one. The first question, if I understand well, was about the character of the legislative framework that we propose. Indeed, the harmonized standards for construction products are obligatory, but these are standards that define the assessment methods for specific products. So it's then for the producer, manufacturer of a specific product to come up with specification of the product and declare its properties.
We do not impose specific thresholds per product. We encourage sustainability and use of recycled materials, but we do not per se so far impose specific thresholds, if that was the question. Concerning other elements, when we talk about off-site, when we talk about permitting, this is the groundwork we're doing now, hopefully will lead to recommendations or guidance that would allow spreading best practices or maybe eliminate barriers. So here I think we are really trying to look at the process and see what is being done that works, what is still there that is a bottleneck, and work together with the Member States' authorities and the industry to eliminate it. If I understood correctly the second question, you would want to know whether there will be a possibility for the construction ecosystem and industries to benefit from the financial support going forward under the new financial frameworks and funding programs.
Absolutely, this is something we want to ensure. Of course, with the housing crisis that is a stark reality, but also the need to uptake for innovation uptake, for uptake of digitalization, finding sustainable solutions also that allow for the buildings to be long-term sustainable and affordable for inhabitants, we absolutely see a need to support the companies also through the upcoming funding possibilities towards achieving these objectives. The third question concerned the Irish case, I think, and the market surveillance question of being proactive versus reactive and allowing specific situations on the ground happen. As you know, and I think we have discussed also internally many times, there is a serious issue with the possibility and capacity of market surveillance authorities across Europe to really check all the products that are entering the market.
What we try to do through our work is to really equip them with means and solutions to be as efficient as possible and to prioritize their activity well. We do have programs and projects that allow concentration of efforts for specific areas of danger of risk. We try to also run the so-called PCAs, which are coordinated actions focusing on specific areas where we know, where we have been signaled that difficulties or deficiencies may arise. So there is room to be proactive, but I think the Irish case specifically also shows that even with all the goodwill and diligence and tools that are available for market surveillance authorities, there are situations that are not caught and there are situations that are very serious. So the job is not yet half done and we need to look at ways...
Okay, please conclusion.
Speaker 31
I think we'll have to continue the conversation if you allow, I'm sorry for this.
Stefan Lehner
I think the debate has shown very much that there's a deep need to dive into the issues. I think what we need to avoid is the impression that there's one single solution, but also that it's a fault of a particular either authority or industry. I think it's a collective challenge for all of us to really be partners in this and try to see how we move forward. As Natalia said, when it comes to market surveillance, for instance, lack of capacity, yes, we need to see how we strengthen the authorities with efficient methods, with new tools which can help them surveil the market. It's to some extent similar in other areas.
Enforcement should go as fast and much as possible, but it will never capture all situations. It's the same with taxes and police and crime, but we have to see how we improve as much as we can and that we have a common understanding what is feasible and what is realistic, what is the outcome. And I think that's important for building trust for the various solutions which we have here, which are often innovative or not yet scaled up enough in the market. And I think building trust is only possible if there's confidence that the quality is there, that it's the right thing to do and that people want to move forward really. So I think with that, thank you very much again and it was a real pleasure and honor for me to be here.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much. Thank you for all, for expert, for DG GROW, for host task. So sorry because I don't have enough time. Thank you for debate, for question, but I think now we have many information and it's possible we will have propose for to another another another amendment for for this this regulament and all. Thank you very much and now for conclusion co-chair, please.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you. Thank you very much. I really want to to appreciate the contribution of all our experts. Thank you for your time and also for the members who participated. We know that the Commission is working on new measures for the upcoming months, so your contribution today is particularly valuable.
So we try to do everything that we can to gather all the pieces of knowledge and information that can inform and and, you know, help our work. So today was certainly very helpful. So thank you very much for that.
Good morning, everyone. I'm very pleased to welcome you to this joint meeting of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. The meeting is now open. I would like to inform you that the meeting is being webstreamed and that interpretation is available in German, English, French, Italian, Dutch, Danish, Greek, Spanish, Portuguese, Finnish, Swedish, Czech, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Maltese, Polish, Slovak, Slovenian, Bulgarian, Romanian, and Croatian. I would also like to remind you that the meeting is being held in a hybrid format, with some members participating remotely.
The first item on our agenda is the adoption of the draft agenda. Are there any objections to the draft agenda? I see no objections, so the agenda is adopted. The second item is the approval of the minutes of the meeting of the 25th of October 2023. Are there any comments or objections to the minutes?
I see no comments, so the minutes are approved. The third item is the chair's announcements. I have no specific announcements to make today. We will now move on to the main item on our agenda, which is the exchange of views on the housing crisis in the European Union. This is a very important and timely topic, as many citizens across the EU are facing increasing difficulties in finding affordable and adequate housing.
Irene Tinagli
Good morning, everyone. Welcome to this joint meeting of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. We are here today to discuss the housing crisis in the European Union, a topic that is of utmost importance for millions of citizens across our continent. Housing is not just a roof over one's head; it is a fundamental right and a prerequisite for a decent life, for social inclusion, and for the smooth functioning of our internal market. However, we are witnessing a growing crisis, with rising prices, lack of affordable housing, and increasing homelessness in many of our member states.
This joint meeting is an opportunity for us to hear from experts, stakeholders, and policymakers about the challenges we face and the potential solutions at the European level. We have a very full agenda today, so I would like to start by welcoming our first panel of speakers. But before that, I will give the floor to my co-chair from the EMPL committee.
Speaker 32
Thank you very much, and good morning to all. It is indeed a pleasure to co-chair this important session. The housing crisis is a multifaceted issue that touches upon social policy, economic stability, and the rights of consumers. From the perspective of the EMPL committee, we are particularly concerned about the impact of housing costs on the most vulnerable members of our society. When a significant portion of a household's income goes towards rent or mortgage payments, there is less left for other essentials like food, healthcare, and education.
This contributes to the cycle of poverty and social exclusion. We need to look at how European policies can support member states in increasing the supply of social and affordable housing, and how we can ensure that the internal market for housing services works for everyone. everyone. everyone. everyone.
everyone. },{ everyone.
everyone. everyone. everyone. everyone. everyone.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, so let's resume our work. We move to the point five on the agenda, organized by Policy Department for Transport, Employment and Social Affairs, namely the workshop on housing for students and young people in training. This committee has long focused on the housing challenges facing young people and students, a priority that is also reflected in our report. The Commission's European Affordable Housing Plan highlighted specific measures for this group, and to explore this further, we commissioned a study and organized today's workshop. The study was published this week.
Let me show you. So, some publicity. And we'll now dive deeper into its findings. So, we are joined by three experts: Joris Hoekstra from Delft University, Constant Witterbrood, Luxembourg Institute for Socio-Economic Research, and Yvonne Franz, University of Vienna. So, first, I'm pleased to introduce Dr. Joris Hoekstra, an associate professor at TU Delft and guest professor in South Africa.
So today he'll present the key findings of the study that he prepared for our committee. And Dr. Hoekstra, you have the floor.
Joris Hoekstra
Thank you very much. I have a presentation which I will hopefully start now. Well, this is the first slide. So if I can move onto the next one. So my name is Joris Hoekstra.
I'm associate professor in housing studies, Delft University of Technology. Much of my work focuses on the impact of the housing crisis on young people. And like the chair just have said, I've worked hard in the last couple of months on this study on housing for students and young people in the EU commissioned by the House Committee. And today I will present the main findings and recommendations of this study. So I think it's good to first start by outlining the problem, because in my view, yeah, we have a clear student housing problem within the European Union.
Across the EU, students increasingly struggle to pay, to find affordable housing, and also their housing costs are much higher than the average.
So on average 28% of students spend more than 40% of their income on on housing, which indicates a clear affordability problem. And at the same time across the EU there's a shortage that's estimated at around 3 million students beds. And of course there are differences between countries, there are differences between regions and cities, but overall I think that yeah most EU countries face a serious student housing problem. So why is it important to to look at this? Of course it's important for the sake of the students themselves because research consistently shows that lack of good and affordable student housing has a negative impact on the well-being of students, on their academic performance, on their freedom to make free study choices.
But there are also negative impacts on yeah more on a system level. Lack of good student housing can have a negative effect on on social cohesion and on regional competitiveness. So in that sense I would say that student housing is much more than a roof over the head of students, but it really should be considered as as critical social infrastructure. So also in the European Affordable Housing Plan the needs and the problems of students and young people in training are identified and the plan proposes a number of concrete actions to support students, particularly through the social pillar. And also in the resolution on the housing crisis of the European Parliament yeah students are emphasized as a as a vulnerable and an important target group.
So what did I do in my my study? First of all I carried out a data analysis on the housing situation of students. And on top of that I've conducted literature reviews on different aspects of student housing that are addressed in the European Affordable Housing Plan. And in the end yeah these study activities conclude in a six-point action agenda for policymakers at the EU level, which I will present in in the sequel. So the first action point is the need to invest in data collection and and research.
As I found out when I was preparing my study, the research and data landscape with regard to student housing is is quite fragmented. For example comparable information on the student students' housing circumstances is not available for all EU countries. Eurostat does not collect that information. There is some information available from the Eurostudy student survey, but that does not cover all EU countries and also it only covers students who are in higher education and not for example students who are in training or who follow vocational education. And also in the academic literature yeah you can see that there are clear biases.
First of all in terms of topics we see recently that there is quite a strong focus on privately provided student housing, which is often linked to processes such as financialization. But for example on public student housing there's very little research being done. And also in terms of geographical coverage yeah I think we can see that there's a clear underrepresentation of for example the Central and Eastern European EU countries.
So it's really hard to find out what's actually going on there in terms of student housing and the problems of students on the housing market. We do see, if we browse the literature and the grey literature as well, that there are a lot of innovative housing solutions popping up everywhere across the European Union. And I think that's a really nice signal, but still most of these housing solutions are not yet evaluated. So yeah, all in all, I think there is still a lack of good data and research which can limit effective targeting and policy making. And in my view, I think there's quite a lot that the European Union can do to address these gaps.
So I would say it's really important to develop EU-wide monitoring system on the housing circumstances of students. Perhaps Eurostat could play a role there. There is a strong need also to, yeah, to collect all the information that is there on websites and in the grey literature on, yeah, on examples and share them across member states, evaluate them. So I think it's really good that the European Housing Alliance has been set up, and in my view they can clearly play a role in collecting and sharing that information. And last but not least, Horizon Europe could also find new research and innovation initiatives on student housing in order to come to, yeah, to better data and evidence, which hopefully will also lead to better and more targeted policy making.
Well, the second action point is to treat students and young people in training as priority groups in housing policy. As I've said already, I think we should consider student housing as an essential social infrastructure, which also requires state support. In my view, it's also very important that member states develop a dedicated strategy for student housing. I know that some members of the committee have just visited Ireland, and I think that country is a good example where they have just published a national student accommodation strategy that particularly develops measures to deal with the student housing problem. Of course, it's important that such a strategy is embedded in a broader housing policy and also that it's, yeah, that it's created in co-creation with the students themselves and with the educational institutions.
The third action point is building more housing. As I've said, there is a large shortage of student housing, and in this respect, my recommendation would be to focus particularly on building more purpose-based student accommodation, or as abbreviation, PBSA. This type of accommodation is in short supply, and it directly serves the need and preferences of the students. It also has the advantage that it does not compete with other segments of the housing market because it's particularly focusing on students. It can be located near educational institutions, near public transport facilities, and we often see that PBSA has communal spaces that can also help to foster the cohesion and the integration of students.
And what I also think it's important, if we are going to construct new PBSA, yeah, to look particular at flexible and modular construction.
So ideally, I think new PBSA should be constructed in such a way that it can be transported from one location to another. Because if we look at projections around numbers of students, yeah, there are some indications that after 2030, due to demographic decline, the number of students may actually decrease. So it's important that you can hopefully also adapt accommodation to that by perhaps moving accommodations from areas with low demand to areas with higher demand. So I think that's an important issue to further explore. Also here, I think the EU policies can play an important role through funding, for example, through the European Pan-European Investment Platform.
And yeah, also other European funds could be used. But I think it's very important that if we are going to fund new public or new purpose-based student accommodation, yeah, that we clearly look at the affordability of that accommodation. So that means that, yeah, we should not only provide financial support, but we should combine the financial support with regulatory measures or agreements at the national level that ensure long-term affordability. So that could be rent regulation, long-term agreements, revolving funds, etc. But without such agreement, I think there's a high risk that, yeah, the new accommodation will soon be unaffordable for students.
Last but not least, I also see merit in mobilizing new streams of housing finance. In my report, I make a plea for the creation of what I call a EU intergenerational student housing fund that uses private savings to finance supply of new student housing. Well, for more details, I refer to my study, but the idea there is that the older generations invest in student housing for the younger generations. Yes. The fourth action point is to better use the existing housing stock.
We already see that a lot of initiatives are going on there in different member states. But also here, I think there's a need to, yeah, to scale up and share best practices through the European Housing Alliance and the Pan-European Investment Platform. Yes, it's also important, I think, to, because not all students live in PBSA, to look at what's happening in the private rental market. We see there that students, particularly exchange students and international students, often are confronted with high security deposits or risk-averse lessors. So the European Affordable Housing Plan proposes to come up with a guarantee scheme.
I think that's a very nice idea to further research and develop. And in that sense, I think we can learn a lot from France, where they have already such a guarantee scheme in place. Short-term rentals is an important issue for the European Union. I think it's good to regulate short-term rentals, but it's important also to look at possible connections between short-term rentals and student housing, because I've found out that in some countries, yeah, you see that dwellings are let during the year to students and in the summer period to tourists, for example. So if new regulation would mean that those opportunities actually disappear, that is of course also bad for the students.
So that's important to take a look at these interactions when implementing the European Affordable Housing Act.
And then the sixth point, the last point is focusing on innovation, technical innovation, social innovation. I think that's an important task of the EU anyway. There are different funds that can play a role there: Horizon Europe, Cohesion Funds, New European Bauhaus, Affordable Housing Initiatives. And like I said before, I think it's particularly important to look at modular housing and at housing that can be possibly moved from one location to another. So to conclude, I think my presentation and my study in much more detail shows that the EU faces a serious student housing challenge that can have a negative impact on social inclusion, equal access to education and competitiveness.
And I think there's a clear role for the EU to play in in addressing these these challenges through the various EU funds and initiatives. I think they can really help to kickstart and reinforce national initiatives and yeah, make make the housing situation for students a bit better. Thank you.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Dr. Constance Uyttebrouck, who is a research associate at the Luxembourg Institute for Socio-Economic Research.
Constance Uyttebrouck
Thank you so much. It's an honor to be here today to provide some insights into the provision of housing for students and young people in training in the European Union. And during this short talk, I will first expose some recent trends in student housing provision before discussing their impacts if it moves and finally reflecting critically on current actions and formulating a few recommendations. So let's start with the trends. Student housing provision has witnessed dramatic changes over the last few decades.
And these changes are related to the expansion and diversification of the student population in the context of the internationalization of higher education institutions. And this has notably led to a growing number of students navigating foreign housing markets. And given the increase in student numbers and the privatization of and decline of student housing provided by higher education institutions, cities and particularly university cities struggle with a structural shortage of traditional student housing residences. And this complicates studenthood, which may be the start of an independent yet possibly precarious housing pathway. And so many students face growing difficulties in accessing suitable and affordable student accommodation in the face of declining institutional support and global patterns of housing financialization and assetization.
And so against these challenges, student protests have taken place in several cities such as Milan, Amsterdam or Lisbon. There are different types of student housing provision whose historical prevalence varies depending on local housing regimes. And in line with the changes I've just outlined, non-profit and limited-profit student housing provision has been shrinking and shown quality issues where it's in places where it used to be substantial. This is especially the case of on-campus housing and housing provided by higher education institutions, partly because of decreasing financial resources for these institutions.
By contrast, off-campus student housing has expanded, primarily in the private rented sector, taking the form of shared housing in the existing stock and purpose-built student accommodation, or PBSA, in new housing provision. And while private PBSA has become widespread in the UK, for instance, it is still emerging in continental Europe and mainly caters to international students. Apart from the private for-profit sector, research has also examined emerging youth collaborative housing initiatives and student cooperatives. However, at present, there does not seem to be any research on a housing offer that would specifically target young people in training, perhaps because such an offer just doesn't exist, and it makes it an important research gap for us researchers to address. For-profit student housing has dominated supply in recent years and taken two main forms.
In the existing stock, private landlords have converted single-family houses and apartments to shared accommodation for students, following buy-to-let logic, but this can also be viewed as a way of exploiting sharing practices to maximize rent extraction at the expense of affordability for students. In new housing provision, market-led PBSA has become a preferred alternative niche asset class for real estate and financial actors, and this financialized form of PBSA has been reconfiguring student housing. This market segment includes hybrid models that mix PBSA with hospitality to maximize occupancy rates. And in secondary cities in particular, PBSA has played a specific role in economic and urban development. In these contexts, it was enabled by the combination of several actors, policies, and strategies that rely on the development of the knowledge economy that consider international students as drivers of urban renewal and that need to increase their housing supply.
Lastly, PBSA may be incorporated into newly built shared housing developments for students and so-called young professionals, so people aged typically 20 to 35 who are entering the housing and labor markets concomitantly. Such combinations can be the result of both private and mixed initiatives involving public or non-profit actors. For example, in my own research, and just to illustrate, I examined a project in Amsterdam that combined student housing and privately owned studios that were mostly occupied by young working people, and that resulted, and this project resulted from the coalition of public and private actors. A second interesting case is the Snabba Hus...
Irene Tinagli
Mrs. Estebrooke, if you can slow down a little bit so the interpreters can... And also if you can close in one or two minutes, so okay.
Constance Uyttebrouck
A bit slowly, sorry for the translators. So the Snabba Hus initiative in Stockholm resulted in the construction of non-profit rental housing using prefabricated containers for people aged 18 to 30, and it took place on a former industrial site. And both these projects happened thanks to specific governance arrangements, but such hybrid programs also require improved regulations to avoid undesired outcomes, be it regarding long-term affordability or spatial quality.
I will now provide some insights into the impact of these trends with a focus on the tenant, housing supply, and urban perspectives. From the tenant perspective, student housing may present a hidden curriculum referring to variations in student housing experiences and their relationship with uneven academic trajectories. And this hidden curriculum stratifies students according to class, gender, and race. Discrimination and structural disadvantages are indeed experienced by certain groups, especially among international students who are also more subject to chaotic housing pathways and housing precariousness. Beyond students, young tenants more broadly who live in market-led shared accommodation are offered a presumed flexibility that may mask insecure and precarious situations that last.
Also research on collaborative youth housing has discussed the challenges and the pressures of developing the competencies assessed through criteria such as commitment, motivation, to become a resourceful tenant. Then from the housing supply perspective, PBSA and related niche asset classes have become a preferred investment in residential real estate, in part because they offer higher profitability for investors. But they also contribute to worsening the financialization of housing and the related housing affordability crisis. And as a matter of fact, the strong increase in international students, the creation of partnerships between universities and private actors, as well as flexible planning regulations in certain contexts, all of this has facilitated the entry of financialized PBSA companies in local housing markets. So in the face of the emergence and fast development pace of these market segments, local governments need reinforced regulations, effective enforcement means, and specific actors and instruments supporting them in this endeavor.
Finally, from the urban perspective, student housing provision is tightly intertwined with new spatial economic discourses. Attracting students is central to the regeneration and economic development of post-industrial cities in particular, but this process may enhance youth-driven forms of gentrification. The related social-spatial exclusion patterns are also the result of urban transformations that support the knowledge economy and act as spatial fixes related to universities for capitalist urbanization. Local authorities play a role in this process, often they seem to consider students as less demanding newcomers and an easy target group in urban regeneration areas. And in city centers too, student housing has effects.
For example, student room rentals in existing apartment buildings can lead to a form of densification driven by financialization and further contribute to inner city change. So I will conclude by discussing current actions and suggesting a few recommendations related to what I've just mentioned. The European Affordable Housing Plan aims to, among others, help build more student housing by mobilizing investment. And I just think it's important to remain cautious as to the type of investment mobilized because market-led student housing provision has proved to fuel housing financialization and assetization as I've said before.
Another action of the plan is to reduce or eliminate the need for a security deposit which can only be encouraged in principle although I must admit I could not find specific research discussing the deposit as a barrier per se in student housing trajectories. So there's probably another relevant research gap to investigate. And finally the plan aims to identify and disseminate innovative accommodation models for students and young people which again innovation is a principle to be generally encouraged obviously but I would just like to emphasize the importance of remaining critical of innovation in the discourses of market intermediaries offering new forms of accommodation not only because they are not always that new sometimes they just repurpose or recommodify older concepts but also because innovation can be discursively used to provide surface responses to crisis all the while avoiding addressing structural issues in the way housing is provided. So just to wrap up I'd like to end on three recommendations that could contribute to strengthening the knowledge around the provision of student of housing for students and young people in training and hopefully make housing systems fairer overall. Firstly support and federate student housing observatories to improve the knowledge of the nature and the geography of the housing stock catering to these groups across Europe.
Secondly higher education institutions need support to provide more affordable and genuinely higher quality student housing. And lastly there's potential in supporting also non-profit and limited profit organizations that intermediate truly affordable and decommodified shared housing for students and young people more broadly. So I thank you for your attention and I'll be happy to discuss this further in the Q&A sessions.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to Dr. Yvonne Franz senior lecturer and postdoc researcher at the Department of Geography and Regional Research of the University of Vienna and her presentation will focus on student housing role in the broader urban context.
Yvonne Franz
Thank you very much. It's a great pleasure to have the opportunity to speak about student housing through the lens of social infrastructure as my two colleagues already started to put the lenses on. So my claim in the in our study that we published in 2022 is that we should ensure social cohesion in urban communities and student housing can be a major role or can play a major role in this. My presentation is also structured in three parts. I start with a more general approach to student housing and the concept of social infrastructure and then I bring down what we talked about on the case of Vienna and I show you some learnings from our study and I identify some emerging contestations that are also prevalent in other European university cities and I conclude with critical reflections on the EU affordable housing plan.
So more than a roof student housing as social infrastructure includes already two key components or two concepts that we need to clarify a bit more precisely because as the already mentioned survey shows us that most of our young people and students live in across European countries not in PBSA but usually with parents and with the partner and this is not due to their let's say personal perception or personal preference but this is mostly due to a lack of opportunities to live in decent adequate and affordable student housing.
So if we really want to talk about student housing and PBSA as an option, we should rather think about what can we use in the sense of community building that we learn from living with partners and living with families to really build PBSA that target the social component of housing, having a community where you feel a certain belonging and also feeling at home. So access to adequate and affordable housing in that sense is key for a cohesive society. And social cohesion is supported by the access to housing and social infrastructure, and that is much more than just housing and talking about materials and innovation in material construction. So it is also about local everyday economy, having access to open and qualitatively high designed, highly designed public space. It is about cultural facilities and the access of the neighborhood through public transport.
All of this we know that they are key determinants for vibrant cities. So we should really think about the geography of social housing or student housing as a social infrastructure as well. To fully grasp the role of PBSA, a critical assessment as such is needed first on the inclusiveness of the overall local housing market. And this will show my case on Vienna, where we have a strong social housing market, but it's exactly the reason why international students and students not being born and raised in Vienna need to have access to PBSA because the social housing segment is not accessible for them. It is also about really grasping the idea of socio-spatial disparities.
Yvonne Franz
Ah yeah, it's flashing, thank you. Socio-spatial disparities, including the questions of availability, where is housing available? Especially in university cities, we see a very dense housing market. So housing market entry mechanisms need to be analyzed and understood. It is about accessibility and the proximity for students, of course, between housing and their universities, but also the places of education for young people.
And it is about the general quality of everyday life, because also as our president put it, it is a question of belonging. So let's dig deeper on the case of Vienna. I show you some learnings from our study. And I would like to start with the claim that the equal, let's say, algorithm of students plus gentrification means studentification doesn't fully show the bigger picture. Vienna is one of the most livable cities, also due to the fact that it's the major university city in Austria, that there are nine universities and even more higher education institutions, and that especially the higher education sector is very important for the city's urban economy.
So students should not be seen or perceived as a pressure, but rather as a key component in also in the urban economy.
When we look at figures, I can only support my colleague's, let's say, identification of risk. Be aware that we have a demographic change in Europe. So the numbers of students might not increase as dynamically as we have seen it in the past. However, we do have a very, let's say, different picture across university cities because there are more, let's say, attractive ones and less ones. And even if we grow in student numbers on a very high level, that means 5,000 and more people every year moving to a city and looking for a room.
This is the picture that you can read a bit in more details. I'm referring here to our study again. This is Vienna, and we asked in our study, where do we find PBSA in the city? And the dark red cloud shows you that most of the PBSA is located quite central in the inner city area, close to university facilities, but also higher education institutions and other education institutions. And you also see some, let's say, less obvious points rather at the city fringes.
They are close to subway lines, so they are the new urban development areas where actually the city is right now growing, where you have the highest numbers of new housing being built. And it's obvious that we also find there the newest PBSA in Vienna. Speaking about accessibility and availability, this also shows literally the picture that connection is key in order to also offer more than housing, but also offer access to urban life, access to other social infrastructure like libraries, theaters, cultural spaces, sports facilities. Interestingly, the picture or there's a causal relationship between new PBSA and the highest costs for PBSA housing. So this map indicates the costs per room.
And the darker dots show you the more expensive PBSAs, while the light dots, interestingly the ones in the inner city area, are the most affordable ones. So we do have a causal relationship between age of PBSA and the costs of the room. And this is due to the fact that we have quite a different situation when we look at for-profit and non-profit PBSA in Vienna. And this figure tells you that since 2010, we see a significant increase in for-profit PBSA across the city. And the reasons are a bundle, and I will show you on the next slide.
There's a certain momentum for for-profit investors in Vienna created by, at the global level, a general transformation in financial and real estate market, as we all know from the 2008 financial crisis. At the national level, there was a reduction of funding for the construction of new non-profit PBSA housing. So that clearly put non-profit PBSA under pressure. At the local level, as you know, Vienna is a growing city in terms of population.
PBSA in new urban development areas as considering students as so-called pioneer residents in category B locations. So the market entry of international investors and operators created a certain competition amongst for-profit and non-for-profit PBSA developers that relates to the accommodation quality, which is maybe preferable that adequate housing is now provided in both sectors. But it's also a pressure on marketing and customer acquisition and already the use of the term customer instead of student tells you that we clearly see the direction of financialization in the PBSA sector in Vienna as well. To give you some pictures, this is one of the most recent opened non-for-profit PBSA in Vienna and on the left side you do not only see buildings, but I rather would like to put the emphasis that the new buildings, not only PBSA for students but also social housing, affordable housing is connected through shared public space. So you cannot really differentiate is this a building where families are living in a social housing segment or is it a student housing.
The recreation areas on the roof of the non-for-profit PBSA are open to all and can be used by everyone in the neighborhood. And the advertisement of the non-for-profit PBSA clearly states that this student dorm is open to young people in education up to the age of 30. On the contrary, this is one of the most recent for-profit PBSA in Vienna and without going into details, you see that student life is privatized. And interestingly, the privatized qualities of housing in this PBSA for-profit can be found in private single one-bedroom apartments and the prices dropped from last year to this year. So our study looked on the qualitative sides of housing in the sense of community building and there are clear differences between for-profit and non-for-profit PBSA developers.
While non-for-profit consider themselves as caretakers, having a responsibility for community life, for-profit rather save their money on communal spaces because this only creates high maintenance costs and a responsibility to also be responsible for community management. I skip this part because my colleagues already mentioned the clear trajectory towards financialization of PBSA and this is a contestation that is interestingly now also more and more visible in Vienna, similar to any other Central Eastern European university city, that we are facing an increasing housing shortage not only due to the fact of housing material costs, but also and particularly due to the rising land prices and plus the construction costs. And this is especially important because when we speak about student housing, we speak about vulnerable social groups in our cities. So action is needed for student housing because otherwise we also lose the reason why cities are vibrant, exciting and interesting for young people. So there's clearly need to react and I move with my slides forward to our recommendations on the EU affordable housing plan.
There are three quotes I extracted. The first one, developing and reinforcing scalable financing models. That's okay, but you rather should look at the empirical evidence that is already existing from international researchers and studies and appreciate the diversity of national policies while also making it possible to scale up the achievements of non-for-profit housing instead of deregulation and making it easier for private developers. The second quote on identifying innovative accommodation models really clearly shows that we need a more precise definition of students and young people that is also based on a robust data set for evidence-based policies. We should take into account also that young people's attitudes towards education and career is changing and that we might really speak early enough about dropping numbers in universities.
And my last point is also due to the fact that I was running an Erasmus Mundus program for a very long time with other universities across Europe. The Erasmus grants can provide housing support as stated in the EU affordable housing plan. However, there is a clear need to update according to inflation. The rising housing costs in university cities are not reflected in the student grants and particularly for non-EU Erasmus students, not the housing per se is a challenge, it is rather the housing discrimination in every university city. And that's my last point.
Thank you.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you. Thank you very much. Now we move on to our Q&A session and I give the floor to Isabelle Kalinowski for four minutes.
Isabelle Le Callennec
Oui, merci Madame la Présidente d'avoir d'abord commandé cette étude et organisé cet atelier qui témoigne de l'utilité de notre commission spéciale logement. L'étude EPRS met en avant la pénurie de logement pour les étudiants essentiellement, mais n'oublions pas les jeunes en formation, vous l'avez dit, les jeunes actifs et les saisonniers. En fait, tous ceux dont le taux d'effort est bien supérieur, et vous l'avez dit, à la moyenne et qui devraient, de mon point de vue, accéder en priorité au logement social ou abordable. Vous venez d'indiquer des pistes et des recommandations et notamment le financement innovant. Moi, je pense comme vous qu'il convient de partager les bonnes pratiques.
Et il y en a dans nos différents États membres. Nous venons d'avoir l'exemple de Vienne où nous nous sommes d'ailleurs rendus en mission, c'était très instructif. J'ai reçu pas plus tard que ce matin un document d'Action Logement, qui est un acteur français majeur du logement, qui s'intitule, c'est intéressant, « Le logement des jeunes, premier pas vers l'emploi ». Je vous le recommande. Sur l'accès au marché locatif privé, ça a été indiqué pour les jeunes, il existe dans certains États membres des dispositifs qui visent à sécuriser les relations entre les propriétaires bailleurs et les jeunes, à favoriser ce qu'on appelle l'intermédiation locative, l'habitat intergénérationnel, j'avais encore un exemple à la radio française ce matin, et garantir en fait des prix abordables pour les pour les jeunes.
Alors en fait, Madame la Présidente, plus nous auditionnons, plus je vois vraiment l'utilité de collecter et de partager les bonnes pratiques de nos États membres. Alors je souhaite demander à la Task Force comment est organisée la collecte d'informations, si les ministres du logement qui se sont, je crois, réunis récemment en sont destinataires pour être source d'inspiration, et si nous n'aurions pas intérêt, mais c'est peut-être déjà une idée, à disposer d'une espèce de plateforme d'accès à toutes ces bonnes pratiques qui pourraient être utiles à l'ensemble des acteurs du logement, de l'immobilier et les financiers bien évidemment de nos différents États membres. Je vous remercie.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you, Isabelle. I collect another question before giving the floor back to our experts, Marko Vesligaj from S&D.
Marko Vešligaj
Thank you chair, I'll speak on Croatian. Evo prvo hvala svima i hvala našim panelistima koji su danas ovdje sa nama. Vjerujem da ćemo se svi složiti kako ekonomska stambena kriza nije samo ekonomsko pitanje već pitanje jedne društvene pravednosti i budućnosti mladih u Europi. I to smo danas već čuli ovdje od govornika jer sve više mladih odgađa osamostaljivanje, profesionalni razvoj, osnivanje obitelji jer si jednostavno ne mogu priuštiti vlastiti dom. Dolazim iz Hrvatske gdje je situacija posebno zabrinjavajuća.
Istraživanje koje sam proveo na nacionalnoj razini pokazuje da čak 70% mladih ne može niti priuštiti kupnju stana, ali niti ne može plaćati najam. Nažalost neslavni smo po tome da se u Hrvatskoj također mladi iseljavaju najkasnije iz roditeljskoga doma u prosjeku sa 31 godinom, zapravo 33,3 godine. Također evo najnovija analiza pokazuje da i Hrvatska zaostaje jako i u dostupnosti smještaja za studente jer taj postojeći smještaj kojega imamo u Hrvatskoj za studente pokriva samo 10% njihovih potreba studenata. Dakle kao turistička zemlja dodatno suočavamo se i sa problemom da studenti koji su u privatnome smještaju moraju ranije dakle izlaziti iz stanova dakle prije nego što počne turistička sezona dakle prije ljeta jer zapravo vlasnici žele brzu zaradu na kratkoročnom najmu. I mislim da stanovanje mladih moramo hitno prepoznati kao prioritet, najviše naravno kroz javna ulaganja, kroz regulaciju tržišta, kroz te inovativne modele stanovanja jer mislim da prepuštanje mladih tržištu koje je podivljalo i preskupim privatnim iznajmljivačima dodatno produbljuje tu europsku stambenu krizu i tržište nije i ne može biti iznad jednoga temeljnoga ljudskog prava kao što je pravo na stanovanje.
No jedno kratko pitanje samo imam za postaviti danas panelistima slušajući cijelu ovu prezentaciju vašu, koju biste vi jednu konkretnu mjeru ovaj uveli sada i odmah da to stanovanje postane dostupnije mladima u Europskoj uniji dakle u sljedećih pet godina? Koja je to onako jedna konkretna mjera? Dakle da li pričamo danas o studentskom smještaju ovdje, može se odnositi isključivo na studentski smještaj, ali ja bih više volio da se odnosi naravno na cjelokupnu populaciju mladih koja ne obuhvaća samo studente. Hvala.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, thank you very much. Now I give back the floor to our experts to answer to these two questions and comments. Who wants to start?
Joris Hoekstra
Yes, I can start. I completely agree with what the first speaker said. I think we should not look for new innovations as a goal in itself, but a lot of things are already happening across Europe. I also discovered it myself in my study and few people know about it.
Sometimes you see the same initiative pop up in a somewhat different form in another country. So I think yeah, we can indeed win a lot by exchanging those practices, comparing them, evaluating them and yeah, perhaps transferring them from one country to another. So I think yeah, your suggestion to come up with a platform is a very good one. It aligns with one of my own suggestions indeed. I was thinking of the European Housing Alliance that can play a role there or perhaps another organization.
But yeah, I completely agree if we talk about innovation, it's not about per se finding new solutions, but it's equally important to share and evaluate existing solutions because there's a lot of creativity going on in Europe in the field of housing, also in the field of student housing, but I don't think there's anyone who has an overview of it. So it's important to pay more attention to that.
Yvonne Franz
On the second question if I may, I build on your statement. A lot is existing, also space is existing, available space, underused space. So my specific measure would be maybe to think about at the European level about a specific incentive that renting out to young people is incentivized to also make visible the problem, but also to mobilize already existing underutilized space. And I would definitely look more deeper into possibilities to regulate limited contracts, rent contracts, because that's particularly difficult in cities that are also affected by overtourism.
Constance Uyttebrouck
Yes, I will just, much was said already, but I just wanted to add two things that I can think of right now regarding the best practices. I fully agree with the need to improve knowledge and federate these good initiatives. The only thing that I as a researcher find difficult sometimes is to also learn about all the outcomes. And when it's a context we don't know and I mean without in-depth research, it's sometimes difficult to know if a best practice really works. So I think it's important to also remain cautious as to the transferability of best practices from abroad in different contexts with a different history, a different housing system, a different institutional framework.
But I overall agree that there's a strong need to gather information. And regarding the measures to be taken, well, the situation has become so complex and structurally problematic for so many different groups that yeah, there can't be one solution of course. But I would say that overall it's important through several different measures to contribute to decommodify housing provision, for instance in the rental sector, support non-profit limited profit housing provision, make it maybe more difficult for certain financial institutions to yeah, invest in very high yield products. And on the regulation side, there's much to do as well, especially on rent regulation for instance, also ensuring that such regulations are enforced. And yeah, that's what I can think of right now.
Irene Tinagli
Okay, thank you very much. Now we move on to the next questions and I give the floor to Gordan Bosanac for the Greens.
Gordan Bosanac
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for your presentations. I have two concrete questions and one more general. First concrete question for Dr. Hoekstra. You mentioned EU-level guarantee for landlords. I'm not familiar with that, so if you can a little bit explain more the structure of this idea and maybe Lela can add something because you said it's already happening in France, so to understand that.
And for Dr. Franz, you also presented to us how the for-profit student investors are coming into the Vienna and how this reflects to the city. But what, how does this reflects to the price of the rent and how this compete with the non-profit? Is there a difference and can you give us a little bit more numbers? And now more general question. As you know, now we are also discussing about the new multiannual financial framework and we are also discussing about the money which will be dedicated for investments in housing.
And of course, student housing will be one of the priorities. And in the past, when we look, there has been already possibility to finance student housing from ERDF. And I know some projects has been happening across Europe, but also some mistakes has been happening in ERDF. I know an example of my country, Croatia, there has been investments in student dorms, for example, in very attractive cities like city of Dubrovnik, which probably you all know and which needs extra accommodation. And then what happened that during the summer, the university will rent the student housing for tourists, like in July and August.
And it was financed by EU money. So I don't know if this is legal or illegal, but it for me was just surprising that we can actually invest EU money on also to like benefit from the tourism as well. So I would like to hear your opinion on that and actually which guarantees we should, which safeguards we should put in EU money not that this money will contribute to the further financialization also of the student dorms. So what guarantees could we have not to repeat some mistakes from the past? Yeah, thank you.
Leila Chaibi
Merci, Madame la Présidente. Et oui, je vais parler en français. Oui, merci beaucoup à tous les trois pour vos interventions, elles étaient très intéressantes. Et moi, je rêve en fait que toutes vos préconisations, elles soient incluses dans le plan d'action de l'Union européenne pour le logement abordable. Je rêve que toutes vos préconisations, tous vos constats, ils aient été pris en compte dans le rapport de cette commission logement.
Mais c'est pas la première fois qu'on a des auditions ici qui sont très intéressantes, qui sont très pertinentes, et ça se reflète pas malheureusement dans le travail, dans le rapport de Monsieur Jimenez qui a été voté au Parlement. Mais bon, du coup, merci. Moi ce que j'entends en fait au-delà de la question de l'échange de bonnes pratiques dans vos trois interventions, c'est la nécessité, comme vous venez de le dire Madame Huiterbroek, de démarchandiser le logement. De reprendre le contrôle en fait, parce que le constat que vous faites, c'est que la marchandisation du logement, la financiarisation du logement, ça a un impact négatif sur le logement étudiant, comme vous l'avez dit Madame Franz, sur la qualité du logement étudiant. C'est des logements de moins bonne qualité pour les étudiants, et aussi sur l'offre en fait et l'accessibilité.
Voilà. Donc et deux questions sur la garantie universelle des loyers. Alors en France, on a le dispositif Visale.
C'est vrai que ça montre, c'est important de supprimer, de remplacer, de donner une alternative au dépôt de garantie qui est demandé aux étudiants. Ça permet aussi de rendre plus égalitaire l'accès au logement parce que et bien tout le monde a cette garantie-là et donc si vous êtes un étudiant dont les parents ont moins de revenus, ben vous avez quand même la possibilité d'accéder à un logement étudiant. Mais ce qu'on constate, c'est que quand elle est pas obligatoire, obligatoire, générale et obligatoire, et bien les propriétaires ils vont toujours choisir quand même le logement, l'étudiant qui a un dépôt de garantie, un garant en fait classique et des parents qui gagnent mieux leur vie plutôt que celui qui vient avec le dispositif de public en fait, la garantie type Visale. Et est-ce que c'est quelque chose que vous avez constaté en Europe et que pensez-vous donc du fait que cette garantie universelle des loyers, que ce dispositif, cette assurance en fait qui remplace le dépôt de garantie soit obligatoire en fait ? Et générale et obligatoire pour tout le monde et pas seulement pour les étudiants qui ont besoin.
Deuxième et dernier aspect mais important je pense, c'est sur le coliving. Bon dommage j'ai, mais je pense c'est important quand même sur, il y a un nouveau problème dans les villes en fait. Ça s'appelle coliving souvent mais comme vous avez décrit c'est les logements étudiants à but lucratif. Et je pense que c'est l'étape d'après Airbnb. Airbnb c'est un moyen qu'ont trouvé les investisseurs pour se faire plus d'argent qu'avec la location de longue durée en se disant ben tiens on multiplie les nuits pour les touristes, ça nous ramène plus d'argent, ça fait un actif financier.
L'étape d'après, on le constate notamment à Bruxelles ici, c'est de se dire ben tiens au lieu d'avoir des colocataires, au lieu même d'avoir du Airbnb où je dois changer tous les deux jours de locataire, de client en fait comme vous l'avez dit, et bien j'optimise la rentabilité financière. Et je crois que ça fait concurrence en plus aux locataires qui sont pas étudiants. Et je voulais savoir si vous avez des données un peu précises sur le coliving parce que je sais par exemple à Bruxelles c'est très développé. Donc le fait de faire du profit sur le logement étudiant mais par exemple à Toulouse, dans une ville comme Toulouse ça l'est pas du tout. Est-ce que vous avez des données sur ce point-là ?
Merci. Merci. Voilà.
Irene Tinagli
It's very clear. So now I'll give back the floor to our experts. I don't know, Dr. Oxstra you want to start?
Joris Hoekstra
Yes, I'm happy to start. I think both the first and the second speaker talked about this rental guarantees. I think the second speaker already explained how it works in France. So that is indeed the idea that there is a guarantee for the landlord that if the tenant does not pay the rent or provokes some damage to the dwelling that that is insured. So in the report we describe the French Visale system.
Actually I also found out to my own surprise that despite the system is in place landlords still ask for a security deposit. So it is not really preventing security deposits which the European Affordable Housing Plan seems to assume. So I think there is definitely some need there for more research. I just heard also that the EIB is doing more research in how to set up such a European level guarantee. But already in France evaluation show that it helps.
Perhaps it does not completely remove the need for security deposit but it makes it more attractive for landlords to also house tenants that are perhaps not from rich families or for which they may have some more doubts that they cannot pay the rent because this guarantee guarantees that in the end they can reclaim the rent.
So I think that that definitely is an interesting avenue to further explore. What Constanza also mentioned, there's surprisingly little evidence actually onto what extent these deposits and this kind of risk-averse behavior of landlords is really affecting students. So I think it's, yeah, it's definitely something we should look into both from the research side and also from how to regulate it in the best way possible.
Gordan Bosanac
But sorry to interrupt, if I just may, but does it increase, does it have at the end also effect to increase the rent prices because it will increase the number of students who will go to the market and then the landlords can increase the basic price? Have you seen this phenomena or not?
Joris Hoekstra
That's an interesting, yeah, an interesting argument. I think I haven't seen that pop up in the literature, but it's, well, theoretically it could work that way. So perhaps that should also be part of the research indeed that could be carried out around this issue.
Constance Uyttebrouck
Yes, I can add something on the question regarding data on co-living. Actually, there have been a few researchers in Europe looking into this, Charlotte Casier in Brussels for instance, Tim White in the UK, and I also have a research project on this topic also interested in short-term rentals in Luxembourg. And data are generally difficult to gather because this form of housing provision relies heavily on digital technologies and they use several platforms including their own to advertise their offer. So very often what we as researchers have to do is to scrap their platforms to try to identify their portfolio and locate them. And this also relates to the fact that in from the planning perspective, in planning terms, they are often located and play with a grey area because depending on the duration of the lease, it can be considered housing or hospitality.
When it takes place in the existing stock that a single-family house is divided into shared accommodation, be it labeled as co-living or not, sometimes it should require planning permission and does not, sometimes it's even not required. The way households are defined is also very complex. So there are all kinds of regulatory issues and planning issues that make the offer relatively difficult to approach. But as you said, be it for-profit financialized PBSA or co-living or short-term rentals, all these are considered niche asset classes that are generally more profitable investment-wise. Manuel Aalbers has also worked on this extensively.
And yeah, they are a way for financial and real estate actors to diversify investments and to also attract different types of capital, foreign capital often, to, yeah, and make it possible to enter new local housing markets. So I don't know if this answered the question, but that's it.
Irene Tinagli
I think this was a very interesting... oh, now they're back. Interesting exchange. We know that there is an issue concerning student housing all over Europe. In the past years, we've seen an increase in student mobility, which we welcome, we encourage, but at the same time, we need to be aware of the consequences and accompany this mobility with proper accommodation, because otherwise the consequences are very hard both on the students but on the whole communities, because when you push up prices, you increase the pressure on housing stock, this has consequences for everybody. So we need to think about that.
I don't think it's taken into proper account in all Member States, to be very honest, and in the political debate overall. This is why in this committee we tried to emphasize this in at every opportunity that we had, through the public hearings, through the study, and I really want to thank all the colleagues that supported this effort. And I also want to thank the Commission. It's reflected in our report, it's reflected in the Commission plan that was published in December. And talking about the Commission, and given that we have back the microphone, I wonder if the representative of the European Commission wants to take the floor to say something.
Speaker 45
Yes, with pleasure. Yes. Hello. Hello all. No, thanks a lot for this workshop, which was very interesting.
As Madame the Chairman just said, this is a priority and it's not a coincidence that in the affordable housing plan, students is one of the two groups that we consider as clearly vulnerable in terms of access to housing. And we have specific actions on them, including for instance the student deposit guarantee that we are exploring together with the EIB and with colleagues in the not just the task force but also DG Education. And we have other actions like looking into compiling innovative practices, which was also one of the ideas that was raised here, and also increasing the Erasmus Plus money so that the students disadvantaged could also participate in the program, so not just those that have a family support behind them. So I would like to maybe give also one small informative point. We already had the first Housing Alliance meeting specifically dedicated to student and young people this week.
We had participation from Member States administrations both from educational ministries and from housing ministries.
So we are making that they work together because often student housing and young people housing fall between two chairs. So sometimes neither the education ministry nor the housing ministry takes sufficiently care of this specific population. But for us and for my Commissioner, Commissioner Jørgensen in particular, is one of the most pressing issues because this is about our future. This is about having, you know, ensuring that there is a social and mental health of young generations, but also it means that we make sure that we can size all the talent that we have in Europe and that we continue fostering exchange and mobility of students, apprentices and young people in general. I would also like to say that one of this issue of exchange practices, it has been one of the topics that have been raised by the Member States in this meeting I just have mentioned.
And also the European Parliament has proposed to have an action pilot action on having an observatory of student accommodation, which we think is a very good idea. And we are working with it together with our colleagues in DG Education to to bring it to a good end. So we will be working on it. Thank you very much.
Irene Tinagli
Thank you very much. So now we can really conclude our workshop. So I greet and thank our our experts and our guests. Just one last point for the MEPs that are present here because we have one last point in the agenda of the Housing Committee for today. It's it concerns the report on the Lisbon Mission.
So if you have any comments or things that you want to highlight or to discuss, you can use it now. Otherwise we can just okay. So we can close our committee meeting and thanks again to everyone. Have a nice day.
Hello.
Speaker 46
Hello. I work with Leila Chaibi. So I just had a question around the what you said about exploring the the rent guarantee in the in the European plan. Do you have some kind of agenda around it? Like hoping to have a deadline to yes.
Speaker 47
Timeline. Yes. It's so basically it's taking a little bit more of time than what we wanted because we are thinking about an EU guarantee that will be using EU invest money. Okay. So EIB, you know that they are EIB and the EIF, they are specific they work specifically in creating this kind of financial instruments like guarantees.
So we thought it would be a good idea to have it funded with EU invest money. But to go through that process and to create the new product that can be taken up by the national banks and promotional banks.
Good morning, everyone. I'm very happy to welcome you to this joint hearing of the IMCO and ITRE committees on the topic of the housing crisis in the European Union. This is a very important topic for many of our citizens, and I'm glad that we have the opportunity to discuss it today with such a distinguished panel of experts. The housing crisis is a complex issue with many different facets. It's not just about the lack of affordable housing, but also about the quality of housing, the energy efficiency of buildings, and the impact of the housing market on the wider economy.
In recent years, we've seen a significant increase in house prices and rents across the EU, which has made it increasingly difficult for many people, especially young people and low-income families, to find a decent place to live. This has a number of negative consequences, including increased poverty and social exclusion, as well as a negative impact on labor mobility and economic growth. The EU has a number of tools at its disposal to address the housing crisis, including the European Structural and Investment Funds, the European Fund for Strategic Investments, and the European Semester. However, it's clear that more needs to be done at both the EU and national levels to ensure that everyone has access to affordable and high-quality housing. Today's hearing is an opportunity for us to hear from experts on the causes of the housing crisis and the potential solutions.
We'll also have the opportunity to discuss the role of the EU in addressing this issue. I'm looking forward to a very productive discussion. I'll now hand over to the chair of the ITRE committee, Mr. Buzek, for his opening remarks.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm also very happy to be here today for this joint hearing. As you said, the housing crisis is a very important issue for many of our citizens, and it's one that the ITRE committee is very concerned about. From our perspective, the housing crisis is closely linked to the energy transition. Buildings are responsible for a significant share of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the EU.
Improving the energy efficiency of buildings is therefore essential for achieving our climate goals. However, we also need to ensure that the energy transition is fair and inclusive. We need to make sure that the costs of energy efficiency improvements are not passed on to tenants in the form of higher rents. We also need to ensure that there is sufficient investment in social housing and that low-income families are not left behind. I'm looking forward to hearing from our experts today on how we can address these challenges.
Thank you.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.