Architectural Cases

The "Agency for Better Living" exhibit at the 2025 Venice Architecture Biennial served as a pivotal platform, drawing visitors from across the globe who shared a common concern: the escalating unaffordability of urban living. Recognizing the growing urgency of this issue, architects and curators Lorenzo Romito, Sabine Pollak, and Michael Obrist embarked on a comparative study of Rome and Vienna. These two European capitals, despite their distinct socio-political landscapes, have each implemented unique strategies to address the affordable housing challenge. The exhibition space was transformed into an interactive 'agency,' fostering a collaborative environment for learning, imaginative problem-solving, and critical discussions about potential solutions to the global housing crisis. A year following the successful installation, the trio reconvened to evaluate the exhibit's impact and delve into the unresolved questions that arose from their Venetian 'laboratory.'

During a dialogue with Pollak and Romito, both residing in Vienna, they reminisced about the initial conversations that sparked the "Agency for Better Living" concept, as they awaited Romito's remote participation from Rome. Pollak highlighted Romito's dedicated involvement in advocating for Spin Time Labs, a community initiative in Rome that provided shelter for over 400 individuals before its recent dismantling. This event tragically left many residents unsheltered amidst Europe's severe heatwaves. Upon Romito's virtual arrival, a warm reunion led into a profound conversation about the future trajectory of our cities. Obrist emphasized that the exhibition's origins were rooted in the escalating housing crisis, a dilemma that increasingly affects city dwellers globally, not just in Europe and America. He attributed this to the extreme financialization of the housing market and a delayed governmental response to the crisis. The Pavilion presented their extensive research through a blend of historical timelines, documentary films, and diverse visual content, enabling visitors to explore the historical contexts and current debates surrounding housing in Rome and Vienna. Collaborating with numerous researchers for textual content and conducting interviews with experts, the team delved into both historical and contemporary co-housing models, examining their financial underpinnings and organizational structures. Pollak, reflecting on her fieldwork in Rome with Romito, noted that the financial aspect of housing often remains a significant societal taboo. She underscored how, since the 2008 financial downturn, access to urban living has become a widespread challenge, no longer confined to specific socioeconomic groups.

Vienna was presented as a 'top-down' model, celebrated for its long-standing success in delivering highly affordable housing solutions, including social housing and government-subsidized homes, to approximately 60% of its populace. This comprehensive vision extends beyond mere cost-efficiency, incorporating essential community amenities such as swimming facilities, recreational areas, and communal spaces directly within residential buildings. In contrast, Rome exemplified a 'bottom-up' approach, where housing solutions originated from grassroots movements rather than direct governmental intervention. Obrist highlighted Romito's crucial role in this aspect, noting his deep understanding of the Italian capital's dynamics. The curators acknowledged that the 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' classifications were not absolute, as Vienna's social housing initiatives benefited from grassroots support, while some Roman city officials championed occupied spaces. Pollak emphasized that the true value lay in comparing these diverse systems to uncover potential models and foster constructive dialogue. Romito likened this comparative tension to an 'open space in the middle,' suggesting that no single solution exists for the complex housing crisis.

Pollak, Romito, and Obrist reflected positively on the multi-month run of the "Agency for Better Living," appreciating how the contrasting urban models of Rome and Vienna sparked a rich array of conversations about the housing crisis. The installation's influence has extended beyond its initial run, with its discussions continuing to resonate a year later. Romito specifically noted how the ongoing protests and negotiations involving Spin Time, property owners, and the Roman municipality echo the dialogues initiated by the Agency. He stressed the severe conditions, such as 40-degree heat, exacerbating the crisis, with thousands of people on the streets receiving support. Within this context of political activism, the Agency's principles are frequently invoked, even gaining recognition through Vienna's mayor Michael Ludwig's visit to Spin Time Labs in May 2026, further embedding the values presented at the Pavilion into real-world action. These endeavors collectively foster a hopeful outlook toward creating more equitable and accessible urban environments for all, advocating for collaborative and multifaceted approaches to tackle the persistent global housing challenges.

The global surge in remote work is fundamentally altering urban structures and local economies in popular destinations such as Lisbon, Mexico City, Athens, and Bali. This transformation is evident in how buildings are repurposed, apartments are renovated, ground-floor businesses evolve, and housing integrates into the broader economic framework. While the influx of high-earning, globally mobile professionals can stimulate new investment, it frequently drives up property values beyond local affordability, accelerates the conversion of residential units into short-term rentals, and reshapes architectural environments to cater to temporary residents.

This shift is particularly pronounced where international purchasing power significantly outstrips local incomes. Long-term apartments often become short-term accommodations, family homes are subdivided into compact studios, and historic buildings may retain their facades while their interiors are completely overhauled. Neighborhood cafes and shops are increasingly replaced by establishments designed for an international clientele. Cities that attract these mobile workers often boast affordability, rich culture, pleasant climates, robust infrastructure, and a high quality of life. However, the very influx that makes these cities globally desirable can render these qualities inaccessible to their original inhabitants. This raises a crucial question: as cities become global hotbeds, who ultimately retains their place?

Addressing these challenges requires innovative architectural and urban planning solutions that move beyond mere regulatory responses. Strategies such as community land trusts and housing cooperatives can decouple land ownership from speculative value, ensuring long-term affordability. Urban planning in historic centers can mandate the retention of a significant portion of housing for local residents, preventing entire buildings from becoming luxury accommodations. Adaptive reuse projects can prioritize community-focused spaces like libraries, workshops, and affordable coworking facilities alongside commercial ventures. In ecologically sensitive regions like Bali, architectural development must integrate with existing natural infrastructure, emphasizing rainwater harvesting, groundwater protection, preserving irrigation networks, and imposing strict limits on land conversion. The future of these cities lies not in outright rejecting mobile professionals, but in designing environments that accommodate both transient and permanent residents, fostering coexistence and ensuring that belonging remains accessible to all.

The rise of the digital nomad economy compels us to re-evaluate the fundamental purpose of architecture: is a building primarily an asset, a service, or a place of belonging? In an era where cities are increasingly populated by transient residents, the imperative is to ensure that permanence does not become an exclusive privilege for those with financial means. An optimistic vision would transcend romanticizing either purely local or nomadic urbanism. Instead, it would explore how both can harmoniously coexist, and what specific types of housing, public spaces, commercial architecture, and ecological infrastructure are necessary to achieve this balance, fostering inclusive and resilient urban communities for everyone.