Inclusionary housing in Copenhagen : An analysis on tenure type mix and socio-economic segregation

Abstract: Since the foundation of the Nordic welfare state, architecture and urban planning have been central elements in the creation of post‐war, modern welfare cities. Ideals of healthy, socially conscious and productive capitalist futures have been articulated through housing design, planning strategies and infrastructure projects. Today however, the welfare city is under pressure due to the current crises our cities are facing. Central issues to these crises are housing unaffordability, rising inequality and socio‐ economic segregation. Over the past few decades, urban planners have become more concerned about these themes in relation to our cities. Housing policies have taken a turn to a more market‐ oriented approach and while there are high investments in real estate, affordable housing supply is still lacking behind. On the other hand, new housing policies are arising that should help make cities fairer and more just for everyone, often referred to as inclusionary housing policies. In this research, various housing policies are being investigated to explore how inclusionary housing addresses the current housing distribution and rising inequality in our cities. To introduce this research, a theoretical framework is outlined, introducing four different concepts that revolve around affordable housing: inclusionary housing policies, socio‐economic segregation, social mix and people‐based policies. This is followed by a methodology section and analysis consisting of two separate parts. First, a literature review is conducted to see how each of the described concepts relate to the Nordic context, after which the geographical focus is laid on Copenhagen, Denmark. In the second part of the analysis, a socio‐economic and geographical analysis is conducted, investigating the distribution of different tenure types in the city of Copenhagen. In this case study, a total of four different tenure types are analysed, namely (1) owner‐occupied housing, (2) private rental housing, (3) housing cooperatives and (4) non‐profit housing. Geographical information systems were used to map the change in distribution of each tenure type, for the period of 2000 to 2021. In addition, possible relations to patterns of socio‐economic segregation are explored, by comparing the change in distribution of tenure types to changes in distribution of average income levels. A significant overlap was found between new housing development areas and areas showing a higher average disposable income in 2019 compared to 2000. In regard of this, recent literature have warned that more market involvement in housing is expected to contribute to income disparities and segregation (Van Ham et al., 2016). The obtained results of this research can be considered in light of this, confirming that the distribution of tenure types is related to patterns of segregation. While this research brings new insights on housing developments in Copenhagen, it is suggested that the case of Copenhagen provides more widely applicable warnings for other cities undergoing a similar neoliberalization of the local housing market. This calls for a political shift in housing development, in which housing must be approached as a public good. On top of that, affordable housing should be made accessible and equally distributed around cities, to avoid further processes of socio‐spatial segregation and polarization. To achieve this, political and ideological strategies must be restored in order to build further on a modern welfare state, providing affordable and good housing for all.