Notes for translating the Danish term “almene boliger” to English
Jonas Strandholdt Bach, Aarhus University
Heidi Svenningsen Kajita, University of Copenhagen
Roughly 20 per cent of the Danish housing stock is classified as “almene boliger” (previously “almennyttige boliger”) often translated into English as “social housing,” but also “not-for-profit housing,” “general housing,” “housing for all,” “public housing,” and “affordable housing.” (1)
The approximately 611,000 units in this independent housing sector are homes for families and the elderly and student accommodation. The sector comprises around 500 Boligorganisationer (housing organisations), subdivided according to geographical location into smaller boligforeninger (housing associations), whose purpose, according to Danish law, is to “offer appropriate housing for all with housing needs at an affordable rent, and to offer residents influence over their living conditions.” (2) The term “housing for all” builds upon the universal ideas for a classless society of the mid-20th-century welfare state, in which social and housing benefits are assigned to individuals in need and not to a specific dwelling. This housing is not organised according to income, yet it is affordable. Nevertheless, it could not be called “affordable housing,” a category that despite capturing specific socio-economic criteria is often run by for-profit interests.
Housing organisations have been jointly organised in the independent, state-regulated Landsbyggefonden (the National Building Foundation) since 1967. The sector is self-financed through subsidies and loans, which this foundation distributes, along with eventual financial surplus, through a revolving fund system (3). The foundation aims to develop and support the construction of new housing, refurbishment as well as services and social initiatives for tenants. The separate housing organisations are also supported by BL, a federation that represents tenants-, employer and industry interests (4). Public interest is governed by the state through regulation, and by local municipalities who oversee the implementation of physical and social programmes. Furthermore, local municipalities may reserve up to 25 per cent of units in each housing association for residents in need (5). At the level of housing associations, all not-for-profit housing is managed through “tenant democracy.” Within a company structure, tenant-elected representatives, unpaid, make decisions alongside a CEO, caretakers, and administration personnel, all paid, who deal with maintenance, waiting lists, planning, et cetera.
While the centralized financing system affords the long-term sustainability, renovation, and maintenance of the built and social environments of this housing, it also allows state intervention. At this national level, a recent push towards privatization and certain social mixing has upended the notion of “housing for all.” The action plan from 2018 called One Denmark Without Parallel Societies (6), popularly termed the “Ghetto Plan,” targets for eradication a percentage of family units in a small selection of housing associations, listed as “hard ghettoes.” While this extreme policy’s goal is mixing, it problematises and combats “parallel societies” by controlling the composition of tenants through exclusion based on measures such as ethnic origin, crime and levels of income. These initiatives are intensified in the more recent government policy for “Mixed Housing,”(7) this time taking a preventative approach against the undesired tenant composition by controlling the ethnic mix of tenants in a more extensive selection of housing areas. While these policies maintain the not-for-profit principles of “almene boliger,” they prompt the question, whom should the general good of this housing include?
Translating almene boliger into English is difficult because the correct translation depends on context. The most precise translation of “almen” would be something like “general” or “common,” which does not capture the complexities of housing administered by housing associations. The term “social housing” can be confusing because it differs explicitly from other nations systems that target socially disadvantaged groups. In the Danish context, however, the “social” conveys the complex idea that this not-for-profit housing was and hopefully can be for all. In appreciation of this promise of solidarity, we therefore continue to translate “almene boliger” as “social housing.”
(1) E.g. social housing or not for profit housing cf. Housing Europe: https://www.housingeurope.eu/resource-102/social-housing-in-europe]; general housing cf. OECD, http://www.oecd.org/social/social-housing-policy-brief-2020.pdf /6.
(2) Authors’ translation, Bekendtgørelse af lov om almene boliger m.v. § 5 b. Link accessed May 2021: https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2020/1203
(3) Cited from Landsbyggefonden website, accessed May 2021: https://lbf.dk/om-lbf/english-read-more-about-us/
(4) See: https://bl.dk/
(5) The remaining units are allocated on the basis of waiting lists.
(6) The Danish Government, Ét Danmark Uden Parallelsamfund – Ingen Ghettoer i 2030 (Copenhagen: The Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Interior, 2018), accessed May 2021: https://www.regeringen.dk/media/4937/publikation_%C3%A9t-danmark-uden-parallelsamfund.pdf. The criteria for listing a housing association as “vulnerable area”, “ghetto” and “hard ghetto” can be found here: https://danskelove.dk/almenboligloven/61a. A resident run website informs about these recent government initiatives
(7) The Danish Government, Blandede Boliger (Copenhagen: The Ministry of the Interior and Housing, 2021), accessed May 2021: https://im.dk/Media/8/4/Pjece_Blandede%20boligomr%c3%a5der.pdf