This exploratory paper tests whether there is a relationship between the nature of a particular society (represented by its welfare state regime), and the characteristics and appreciation of the single-family dwellings and the apartments within this society. In order to grasp differences in the nature of societies, the study uses the welfare state typology of Esping-Andersen (with the addition of a Mediterranean welfare state regime). In this (adapted) typology, four different welfare state regime types are distinguished: a social-democratic welfare state regime, a corporatist welfare state regime, a liberal welfare state regime and a Mediterranean welfare state regime. Different statistical techniques are used to investigate the relationship between welfare state regime type and dwelling type. First, a number of bivariate tables are presented that indicate how the incidence, tenure category, quality and the appreciation of single-family dwellings compared to apartments differ between welfare state regimes. Subsequently, there is an analysis of the bivariate relations between these aspects. To find out whether the typology of Esping-Andersen really is a useful classification system with regard to the characteristics and appreciation of single-family dwellings as against apartments, a cluster analysis is conducted. The clusters that result from this analysis are interpreted and compared with the typology of the four welfare state regimes. Based on the results of these statistical analyses, some conclusions are drawn and some directions for further research are outlined.

The organisation of the rental market varies from country to country. Kemeny draws a distinction between societies with an integrated rental system (relatively minor differences between the non-profit and the profit rental sectors) and societies with a dualist rental system (relatively major differences between the non-profit and the profit rental sectors). In this exploratory paper, Kemeny's typology is tested against data from the European Community Household Panel (ECHP). The tentative conclusion is that integrated rental systems and dualist rental systems do indeed exist, but there are signs of increasing convergence between the two.

A perusal of the literature on housing debates reveals that the term ‘value’ is mostly applied to express the financial value of a house and is dealt with in economic literature. However, an alternative meaning of the word ‘value’ in the housing literature can be found in research into the values underlying housing preferences, applying research methods from the marketing literature. The explicit combination of moral values and housing policy and design is found neither in the academic housing nor in the philosophical literature. However, diving deeper into the housing debate reveals that there are a host of moral values already present throughout this debate that are often not explicitly articulated and explicated, such as inclusiveness, sustainability, autonomy, and security. The aim of this paper is to address the role of values in housing policy and design. By doing so, we apply the Design for Values approach (DfV). We argue that the DfV approach can help to make implicit moral values more explicit, which can improve the housing debate, housing policy-making, and housing design. The paper first explores which values are relevant for housing policy and design and operationalizes those values. Next, the paper describes key debates in housing such as: What is “adequate housing” in times of rapid urbanization and increasing house prices? We argue that by exploring the underlying values of these debates, stakeholders can create a better understanding of the current (lack of) fundamental discussions on housing issues

The conventional model of social housing in Spain is a peculiarity within European housing policy, in that it is almost entirely owner-occupied. Subsidized owner-occupancy housing maintains the status of social housing for a set number of years, during which time it cannot be sold against market prices. After that period, its status changes, and the housing concerned becomes part of the free housing market. However, recent developments in Spanish housing policy suggest that this model might change in the future. In some Spanish regions, subsidized owner-occupancy housing is now considered as a separate and permanent tenure category and not as a temporal subsidy arrangement. This paper discusses the background and the possible implications of this new policy perspective.