Reframing Housing: UTM scholar’s work on housing policy earns top research prize

Why have rich democracies adopted radically different policy approaches to housing? 

It’s the question at the heart of Through the Roof: Housing, Capitalism, and the State in America and Germany, a new book by award-winning political scientist Alexander Reisenbichler. The book traces the political history behind major housing programs in the two economic powerhouses and reveals how different policy choices have shaped economic growth, inequality, and long-term affordability.

Reisenbichler is an associate professor in UTM’s Department of Political Science. His research explores the politics of housing, financial, and labour markets in Western Europe and North America.  

Recently awarded the UTM Research Prize in the Social Sciences, Reisenbichler will be recognized at the UTM Research Excellence Celebration in spring of 2026, where he will speak about his work. With event plans underway, we sat down with Prof. Reisenbichler to learn more about his research, his new book, and what’s next.

How does it feel to be recognized with the UTM Annual Research Prize, and what does this award mean to you?

It’s a huge honour to be recognized for my research. It means a lot to me, especially because scholars at UTM do such excellent work. 

This award is perhaps also a reflection of the fact that housing has become one of the most important social, economic, and political issues of our time. Housing today is a major driver of economic inequality. We see housing affordability crises all around us, not just in Canada, but around the world.

So, housing really matters — and that goes beyond the academic community and policy circles; it affects people's everyday lives. It has become a top political priority in many countries.

Your work explores the political economies of rich democracies. What drew you to these topics initially?

The financial crisis of 2008-2009 drew me into questions about how states and markets interact. Because housing was at the center of the crisis, I became interested in how governments shape housing markets.  

I quickly realized that countries do this in very different ways. Some subsidize homeownership, others focus on social or rental housing. Some make access to housing credit easy, others much more difficult. Some tightly regulate rental markets; others rely more on market mechanisms.

I wanted to understand where these different approaches to housing come from.

How do you see housing policy intersecting with issues like inequality and financial stability today?

Housing is a major driver of wealth inequality in many countries. The richest households have hugely benefitted from rising property values. But younger, low-income, and often racialized households have struggled to buy or even rent an affordable home. People are increasingly forced to think about housing as a financial investment instead of just a place to live. And this creates political and social pressures that require sensible housing policies that address the problem rather than make it worse.

Also, housing is a massive economic sector in every country and one of the world’s largest asset classes. As we have seen during the crash of 2008, and at other moments in history, housing has the potential to wreak financial havoc. So again, this requires sound housing policies and regulations that prevent housing bubbles and create financial stability.

In your new book, you argue that contrasting forms of capitalism — an export-oriented growth model in Germany and a demand-led growth model in the U.S. — shaped the different housing policy trajectories. Could you explain how these economic models influenced political decisions?

My argument is that housing plays fundamentally different roles in German and American capitalism. And because of that, what policymakers believe to be good economic and housing policies differs across the two countries.

The US growth model is demand-led and relies heavily on credit and consumption. And housing fits right into that model as a key sector that fuels both credit and consumption. US housing programs often had the objective of stimulating housing demand, boosting property prices, and fuelling housing credit, which in turn stimulates private spending. So, in the US, tax and mortgage subsidies for homeowners also served this broader economic goal of generating growth and prosperity. While support for rental housing has remained mostly a footnote, support for homeownership has gradually expanded over the past century – and it is now among the most generous in any rich democracy. 

In this more financialized housing system, many homeowners end up treating their homes like credit cards, borrowing against their own houses to finance spending and other expenses.

And in Germany?

The story is very different there. The German growth model is export-based and relies on high value-added manufacturing as its key sector. That means that consumption and credit are far less important to the German economy. Housing is not a key engine of growth, and the practice of borrowing against homes is almost unheard of.

German housing programs had fundamentally different objectives. They were designed to create affordable housing and ensure price stability in the housing market. That, in turn, supported manufacturing industries because it helped firms attract skilled workers and keep wage pressures down. In this way, housing and industrial needs have long been closely connected.

How did Germany end up with an affordability crisis? It appears they had a good system in place.

Yes, it’s a paradox. The German housing model worked very well for decades after World War II. But over time policymakers got rid of many of these effective programs, such as federal social housing programs. They thought the housing problem had been solved and that these programs would actually hurt the economy by increasing deficits and pulling investment away from manufacturing. In the 2000s, politicians scrapped major housing programs and privatized many social housing units that had created the affordable market that earned Germany its reputation as a “nation of renters.”

Today, Germany is facing an affordability crisis once again. Like in other countries, the reasons include historically low interest rates and demographic changes on the demand side, and rising construction costs and land-use restrictions on the supply side. 

But today’s crisis is also a direct consequence of recent policy failures. Germany got rid of the very tools that had worked in the past, and now it doesn’t have many left.

What lessons can policymakers draw from the divergent paths of U.S. and German housing policy for addressing today’s affordability crisis?

One lesson is that no matter how bad housing crises are, they can be solved with smart policy and political will. Policymakers have tackled crises far more severe than today’s. 

If you take Germany, for example, 4.6 million homes were needed after World War II, because so many buildings had been destroyed. In response, the German government adopted ambitious social housing programs and rent controls that helped solve the housing crisis and kept housing affordable for decades to come. 

So again, it’s really a matter of political will and smart policy. It’s about learning from the past and repurposing tools that were effective before. Tweaking housing programs here and there won’t be enough. You need to go big.

If you could advise governments on one immediate step to improve housing affordability, what would it be?

Governments should support the creation of more affordable rental housing. That means, in many countries, boosting social, public, and non-profit housing programs. When it comes to countries like Canada and Germany, we can look back at what worked in the past and revive and adapt those programs, with sensitivity to today’s context. 

In the U.S., it would be sensible to shift the balance of government support from homeownership markets to the rental sector.

I would also recommend framing housing as an economic issue, and not just as a social issue. In Germany, for example, it’s increasingly difficult for firms to recruit skilled workers and apprentices in expensive economic hotspots. High housing costs also force firms to pay higher wages. All that is starting to undermine the German economy. 

This is where the political left and right could come together. If affordable housing is framed to be in the national economic interest of supporting core industries, it might unify the left and right behind more ambitious housing policies.

What are the next big questions you hope to tackle in your research?

I received a SSHRC Insight Development Grant to study the connection between housing and climate change in the U.S. and Germany. Housing is a major climate polluter and source of carbon emissions, and it is also heavily affected by climate change because of the increased occurrence of extreme weather events. So, I am excited to start new research projects on how policymakers and households in different countries are dealing with these challenges.