Housing Situation and Acceptance of Densification in Global Metropolises

Introduction

Housing developments appear to have long-​term positive benefits for cities and metropolitan regions but (perceived) negative effects for residents. On the one hand, beneficial effects include curbing rising housing prices and costs, containing urban sprawl, and mitigating climate change. On the other hand, fear of potential negative externalities concerning the housing situation such as gentrification and higher local rent prices, loss of local green spaces or traffic volume changes causes city residents to contest new housing developments. This resistance is often labelled as Nimbyism (not in my backyard), referring to the opposition against changes in the nearby built environment while generally accepting such developments elsewhere.

Given the multiple potential benefits and the financial profit opportunities of investments in housing developments, new housing is an everyday reality in cities worldwide. Comparative research on housing situation worldwide and the acceptance of housing developments are, however, missing. Because of this, we are interested in two related research questions in this research project. First, how does the perceived housing situation look like in especially pressured metropolises? Second, how does proximity to new housing projects as well as individual, project-​specific, and political factors influence the acceptance of new housing development projects, which aim at urban densification?

The Project

The project uses survey research and expert interviews to assess the housing situation in six metropolises (Berlin, Chicago, London, Los Angeles, New York, Paris) and examine whether different housing development characteristics, project-​related benefits, and ancillary planning instruments enhance acceptance for urban housing developments. Specifically, the research team collected survey data on the housing situation in six metropolises, namely Berlin, Chicago, London, Los Angeles, New York, and Paris. The total sample consists of 12,611 observations. Besides questions on respondents’ sociodemographic backgrounds and household characteristics, the survey included questions on the respondents’ perception on their residential neighborhood. This part consisted of questions on place-​​based social capital, place attachment, and on the respondents’ perceived neighborhood changes and gentrification. The gathered results allow us to better understand how individuals evaluate housing developments and related policies.

Publications

Wicki, Michael, Hofer, Katrin and Kaufmann, David (2022). Planning instruments enhance the acceptance of urban densification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 119 (38) e2201780119. external page https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2201780119

Debrunner, Gabriela, Hofer, Katrin, Wicki, Michael, Kauer, Fiona, and Kaufmann, David (2024). Housing Precarity in Six European and North American Cities: Threatened by the Loss of a Safe, Stable, and Affordable Home. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1–17. external page https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2023.2291148

Wicki, Michael, Robitschek, Emily and Kaufmann, David (2023). Nuancing Conjoint Experiments: Using Natural Language Processing to Analyze Decision-Reasoning. ETHZ Research Collection. external page https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000649250

Data Brief: Overview (PDF, 763 KB)

Data Brief: London (PDF, 1.1 MB)

Data Brief: New York (PDF, 1.3 MB)

Data Brief: Berlin (PDF, 1.2 MB)

Data Brief: Los Angeles (PDF, 1.2 MB)

Data Brief: Paris (PDF, 1.2 MB)

Data Brief: Chicago (PDF, 1.1 MB)