Introduction

The European Students’ Union (ESU), representing more than 20 million students across Europe, welcomes the European Commission’s European Affordable Housing Plan as a long-overdue acknowledgement that Europe faces not only a housing crisis, but a social crisis that directly undermines the right to education. The Plan’s recognition of housing as a cornerstone of human dignity, and its explicit reference to young people and students as some of the most affected groups, reflects years of student advocacy for housing to be treated as a right rather than a commodity.​​

At the same time, the scale and depth of the housing emergency demand much more than strong language and high-level financial envelopes. Without binding commitments, strong regulation, and clear targets for public and cooperative student housing, the risk remains that this Plan becomes another exercise in political signalling rather than a transformative response to a structural crisis that pushes students into poverty, exclusion and, in many cases, hidden homelessness.​​

No less relevant is the fact, much like the plan itself states, that this is an ongoing crisis and, while ESU appreciates the initiative and the medium to long-term approach it brings to a deeply complex societal hurdle, this approach unfortunately also underscores the lack of immediate solutions or, at least, stress relievers. Therefore, we also take the opportunity to underscore that, as indeed this is a crisis that is very much in effect, this plan lacks proposals that could minimise the current challenges faced, in particular those most vulnerable and affected by the current crisis.

Housing as a right, not a commodity

ESU strongly welcomes that the Plan frames housing as a fundamental precondition for dignity and social inclusion and explicitly distances itself from a purely market-based understanding of housing. This approach is consistent with ESU’s long-standing position that housing is a human right and an essential component of the right to education, not merely another asset class for speculative investment.​​

However, this shift in narrative must be matched with concrete legal and financial measures that reverse decades of treating housing as a speculative good, including strict regulation of rent increases, active public provision of affordable housing, and robust tenant protections. For students, whose budgets are particularly constrained (according to EUROSTUDENT VIII, 74% of students have some sort of financial difficulties), the commodification of housing translates directly into exclusion from higher education and severe mental distress due to constant financial pressure.

Pillar I – Boosting supply with a public and social focus

ESU acknowledges the Plan’s focus on boosting housing supply through cutting red tape, addressing labour shortages in construction, and increasing the availability of land for building, as well as its emphasis on sustainability, energy efficiency and quality standards. These elements can and should support a large-scale expansion of decent, climate-resilient housing, including student accommodation.​

Nevertheless, the Plan remains largely neutral on the crucial question of who will provide this new supply. ESU warns that an unqualified increase in supply, driven predominantly by private investment, risks reproducing and aggravating existing patterns, such as the proliferation of luxury student housing that is unaffordable for the vast majority of students. ESU therefore calls for explicit and binding targets for new public and cooperative student housing units within the implementation framework of the Plan, with clear indicators and timelines at the national and regional levels.​​

Any project labelled as “student housing” and supported under this Plan must meet strict social criteria, like the ones listed below:

• Rent levels proportionate to student budget and support schemes; 
• Compliance with minimum quality and safety standards; 
• Universal design and physical accessibility;
• Meaningful involvement of students and their representative organisations in the planning, governance and monitoring of housing projects to ensure they are fit for purpose. 

Without such conditions, EU-supported investments risk subsidising exclusionary and speculative segments of the housing market instead of addressing student poverty and inequality.​​

Finally, while the plan addresses skills shortages in the construction sector, which is a central aspect, ESU underlines that training schemes alone are not enough; making these professions genuinely attractive requires fair wages, decent working conditions and strong labour rights across the EU, so that workers are properly paid and protected wherever they live and work. From a student perspective, a just transition in the housing sector must go hand in hand with social justice for the people who build and renovate the homes Europe needs, particularly in a sector where low wages are common and very demanding working conditions are common.

Pillar II – Mobilising investment for public and cooperative student housing

The Plan announces significant financial resources through cohesion policy, the European Investment Bank, InvestEU and national promotional banks, and offers increased flexibility in state aid rules by framing affordable housing initiatives as services of general economic interest. ESU recognises that this financial architecture has the potential to trigger a substantial increase in investment in social and affordable housing across Europe, including in student accommodation.​

However, the current Plan does not earmark a dedicated share of these funds specifically for public and cooperative student housing, nor does it establish a European framework for rent regulation or affordability requirements linked to EU-supported projects. ESU therefore calls for:

• A clearly designated portion of InvestEU, cohesion funds and EIB lending to be reserved for public and cooperative student housing, with transparent allocation criteria.
• EU-level guidance for Member States on using cohesion and social funds to support student subsistence costs, including housing, in line with ESU’s proposal to use the European Social Fund and other instruments to address student poverty.
• Binding affordability and rent framing conditions attached to EU-funded housing projects, to ensure that public support does not fuel price spikes or luxury segments but instead delivers genuinely accessible housing for students and other low-income groups.​​

Regulating speculation and short-term rentals

ESU welcomes the Plan’s explicit recognition that speculation and the rapid expansion of short-term rentals have significantly reduced the availability of housing for residents and pushed up rents in many cities, including university towns. The announced EU-level action to improve transparency, empower local authorities to regulate short-term rentals, and combat speculative practices is an important step towards rebalancing housing markets in favour of residents and long-term tenants.​​

At the same time, ESU stresses that the impact of speculative practices and short-term rentals on students is particularly acute in areas with large concentrations of higher education institutions. ESU therefore calls for the forthcoming legislative package on short-term rentals and anti-speculation to:

• Explicitly recognise university cities and campus areas as high-pressure zones in which local and regional authorities may apply strict caps, zoning restrictions or even full bans on short-term rentals.
• Be accompanied by national measures to regulate rent levels, prevent abusive practices, and safeguard deposits, especially for young and mobile tenants who are at higher risk of discrimination and exploitation.​​

Young people, students and “innovative” housing models

ESU appreciates that the Plan identifies young people and students as among the groups most affected by the housing crisis and announces tailored measures such as support for student housing through InvestEU, guarantee schemes to reduce or eliminate security deposits, and affordable rental programmes. The Plan’s recognition of students from disadvantaged backgrounds, international students and other marginalised groups is in line with ESU’s long-standing analysis of how housing intersects with inequality in higher education.​​

ESU also notes the reference to “innovative” housing models, including co-living and intergenerational housing, as well as a proposed Erasmus+ pilot to test more affordable and innovative housing solutions for mobile students from disadvantaged backgrounds. While such models can play a complementary role if they are voluntary, rights-based and designed with student participation, ESU firmly rejects any attempt to present them as substitutes for adequate, independent and affordable student housing. Co-living must not become a euphemism for overcrowding, loss of privacy or lowering of standards under the guise of innovation.​​

In line with ESU’s position on student housing and student poverty, ESU demands that:

• Public student housing to be expanded across Europe, with particular attention to countries and regions where it is currently scarce, using EU structural, social and investment funds.
• Housing continuity be guaranteed so that no student is left without a housing solution between academic years or in situations of force majeure.
• Grants, housing benefits and other support schemes should be significantly increased and indexed to real living costs, including rents in university cities, and Erasmus+ grants in particular should be adjusted to reflect local housing costs and prevent mobility from becoming a privilege of the few.
• Legal protections for student tenants to be strengthened, addressing discrimination and tackling power imbalances between landlords and student tenants, including through protection of deposits and effective complaint mechanisms.​​

The guarantee scheme in the workings of this plan for rentals must be clarified, as ESU believesthat for it to be helpful, it must rely on public institutions as guarantor, as only relying on private guarantors will have a negative impact on isolated students. This point needs to be clarified in the plan. 

Governance, monitoring and student participation

ESU takes note of the planned progress reports on the implementation of the Plan, the European Housing Summit in 2026, and the creation of a European Housing Alliance. These initiatives can become key platforms to coordinate policy, share good practices and track developments in housing systems across the EU.​

To ensure that the Plan effectively addresses the student housing crisis, ESU insists that students and their representative organisations be meaningfully involved in its governance at all levels. ESU therefore calls for:

• Formal representation of ESU in the governance structures linked to the European Affordable Housing Plan, including the European Housing Alliance and the European Housing Summit, as the legitimate European voice of students.
• Systematic inclusion of national and local student unions in the design and monitoring of national and regional housing strategies, in particular where EU funds are used for student housing projects.
• The integration of specific student housing indicators into the Plan’s monitoring framework, such as: the number and share of public and cooperative student housing units; rent levels in university cities; the proportion of students overburdened by housing costs; and the prevalence of hidden homelessness among students.​​

Conclusion

The European Affordable Housing Plan represents an important political breakthrough in acknowledging that housing is a right and that students and young people are among those hardest hit by the current crisis. Many of ESU’s key demands – from the recognition of housing as a social issue to the explicit reference to student housing – are reflected in the Plan and its general direction.​​

Yet, rhetoric alone will not resolve the structural housing emergency that excludes thousands of young people and students from higher education or forces them to study in conditions of overcrowding, exploitation and insecurity. ESU will therefore judge the success of this Plan by its concrete outcomes: the number of genuinely affordable public and cooperative student housing units created, the effectiveness of measures against speculation and abusive rents, the strength of tenant protections, and the extent to which students are truly involved in shaping housing policies. ESU stands ready to contribute constructively to the implementation of the Plan, while maintaining a vigilant and critical stance to ensure that the promises made translate into real, measurable improvements in students’ lives