| R. CHAMAT | OAKS GROUP
Housing tensions do not always signal a crisis. In some cases, they reflect temporary imbalances that correct themselves over time. In Geneva, however, the pressure on housing has moved well beyond that stage. It is now the result of a structural mismatch between sustained demand and an offer that remains durably constrained. Exceptionally low vacancy rates, long development timelines and persistently high construction costs all point to the same conclusion: the current pressure on housing is not about to ease.
In practice, this reality is visible well before it appears in official statistics. Finding a flat takes longer. Constructing a residential building involves growing uncertainty. Every project decision carries more constraints, more delays and more risk. The market is not malfunctioning temporarily. It is operating under permanent strain.
Housing tensions do not always signal a crisis. In some cases, they reflect temporary imbalances that correct themselves over time. In Geneva, however, the pressure on housing has moved well beyond that stage. It is now the result of a structural mismatch between sustained demand and an offer that remains durably constrained. Exceptionally low vacancy rates, long development timelines and persistently high construction costs all point to the same conclusion: the current pressure on housing is not about to ease.
In practice, this reality is visible well before it appears in official statistics. Finding a flat takes longer. Constructing a residential building involves growing uncertainty. Every project decision carries more constraints, more delays and more risk. The market is not malfunctioning temporarily. It is operating under permanent strain.
Geneva’s housing market has been operating below equilibrium for years. With a vacancy rate hovering around 0.34%, it sits far below the level generally considered necessary for a functional market. At such levels, the system has no buffer.
This absence of slack matters. In a market without reserves, even minor changes—an influx of new residents, a delayed project, a regulatory adjustment—translate immediately into pressure on rents and availability. There is no capacity to absorb shocks. Every unit released is reabsorbed almost instantly.
This is not a temporary anomaly. It is the defining condition of the market.
The current situation cannot be explained by a short-term slowdown in construction. It is the outcome of a deficit accumulated over more than a decade. Year after year, housing production has failed to keep pace with Geneva’s real needs.
Population growth, labour mobility and changes in household structures have steadily increased demand. Meanwhile, supply has grown too slowly to offset these trends. Even during periods of heightened construction activity, the market never rebuilt a meaningful stock of available housing.
In concrete terms, every new unit delivered today responds to an existing need. It does not restore balance. The shortfall is not eliminated; it is merely displaced.
One of the defining features of Geneva’s housing market is time. From the identification of land to the delivery of a residential building, the process typically takes eight to twelve years. This includes planning, zoning, authorisations, objections, appeals and successive project adjustments.
This extended timeline is not the result of administrative failure. It reflects Geneva’s institutional model, which prioritises legal certainty, democratic participation and territorial control. These principles are widely supported and deeply embedded.
But they also create a structural lag. Demand evolves far faster than the system’s capacity to respond. Decisions taken today will only translate into housing many years from now—long after current pressures have intensified further.
Over the past five years, construction costs have risen by 20 to 30 percent. This increase stems from multiple, converging factors: higher material prices, persistent labour shortages, growing project complexity and increasingly demanding energy and environmental standards.
These standards reflect deliberate societal choices. They improve building quality, energy performance and long-term sustainability. But they also establish a new cost baseline.
In real-world project execution, there are no credible levers to reverse this trend. Lower-cost construction, as it existed in the past, is no longer compatible with today’s regulatory and technical environment.
Housing pressure is not an abstract concept. It translates directly into lived experience. Reletting rents rise. Selection criteria become stricter. Search times lengthen.
Middle-income households are particularly exposed. Often too affluent to qualify for targeted support mechanisms, yet insufficiently resilient to absorb continuous rent increases, they find themselves increasingly squeezed.
Over time, this dynamic reshapes neighbourhoods and reinforces territorial inequalities. Housing becomes a mechanism of social sorting rather than a neutral good.
Persistent housing tension affects more than residents. It increasingly weighs on Geneva’s economic ecosystem. Labour mobility becomes more complex. Recruitment is harder. Some employers hesitate to expand locally or struggle to attract talent.
In the medium term, this pressure undermines the city’s attractiveness. Commuting distances increase. Infrastructure comes under strain. Quality of life erodes incrementally rather than dramatically.
Housing, in this context, becomes a strategic variable of economic competitiveness.
Several factors suggest that housing pressure in Geneva will persist. Demand remains robust, supported by economic activity, cross-border dynamics and demographic trends. Supply, by contrast, remains structurally constrained by land scarcity, planning frameworks and long production cycles.
Policy measures currently underway are necessary and constructive. But their effects will materialise over ten to twenty years, not in the immediate future. In the short term, they do not alter the fundamental equation.
Expecting a rapid rebalancing ignores the specific temporality of housing.
Geneva has entered a phase in which housing tension is becoming the norm rather than the exception. This situation is neither accidental nor temporary. It is the result of institutional, territorial and societal choices that carry long-term consequences.
Only sustained, continuous and politically accepted housing production can gradually ease the pressure. Until then, scarcity will remain a structural feature of the market.
Housing pressure in Geneva is not about to fade. Vacancy rates, development timelines and cost structures all point in the same direction: supply will continue to lag behind a resilient demand.
Acknowledging this reality is not alarmist. It is a prerequisite for responsible decision-making aligned with the long term. Housing has become a central pillar of Geneva’s economic and social stability. And for the years ahead, the pressure is set to endure.
