What Housing, for Whom, and Where?
I began writing this article at a time when tents had appeared in Rossio Square in Lisbon and Praça D. João I in Porto. The situation may be different by the time this article is published. I do not intend to discuss the tents, the police presence, emergency debates in Parliament or decisions by the Public Prosecutor's Office. Many others have already done so, with more information and a greater interest in those subjects than I have.
I want to write about what I believe should be a matter of general concern: the questions I rarely hear being asked, or which do not seem to receive the attention they deserve.
One issue I have raised before, and which I believe remains relevant, is our tendency to tackle problems by addressing their consequences without sufficiently questioning their underlying structural causes. Perhaps that is why some problems go on and on, like a battery-powered bunny that never seems to stop.
What?
We talk about housing as though the problem had only emerged yesterday and could be solved tomorrow. Neither is true. Full stop.
My personal experience helps explain why.
Even if we knew what needed to be done, how to fund it, where to do it and who would carry it out, it would take, in my assessment, five to ten years to achieve significant results. Nor is it clear that we have the skilled workforce needed to deliver the work. I am not referring to engineers or architects, but to bricklayers, plumbers, tilers and electricians, among others — tradespeople we have been struggling to find for a long time.
It is also worth remembering that, in my experience, we have rarely managed to plan and deliver construction projects within their expected timescales.
Let us start with the basics. When we talk about housing, what exactly are we talking about? Three-bedroom flats in Avenidas Novas in Lisbon or Boavista in Porto? Two-bedroom flats in Vila Nova da Rainha or Poceirão? Apartment blocks in Freixo de Espada à Cinta or by the Foz do Douro waterfront? Houses in Miranda do Douro or Cascais?
As though all these places and properties were one and the same.
What is actually needed in each region?
There is now broad agreement on the diagnosis: we need to increase housing supply. On 23 September 2026, the Minister of Finance described rising house prices in Parliament as one of the country's most structural problems. Citing data from Banco de Portugal, he said that, over the previous decade, supply had fallen significantly short of demand — a situation not seen since the 1970s. The measures outlined included raising the public housing target from 26,000 to 59,000 homes by 2029, incentives for renting and incentives for new construction.
A day earlier, on 22 September, the IMF had reported that house prices in Portugal had risen by 169% since 2015, compared with 55% across the euro area. It described housing affordability as a significant challenge, while assessing the risk of a short-term price correction as contained.
I have no reason to dispute these assessments. But one practical question deserves more attention: we talk a great deal about how much housing to build, and much less about what sort of homes to build and where.
If a well-built home can last a century, while people's needs change every decade, we risk creating problems that will be difficult to put right later.
Since I began working in property, 74% of the sales I have handled have involved two and three-bedroom properties. This reflects my own experience; it is not a representative sample of the country as a whole. Even so, it raises a question: do the property types that dominate sales today match the needs of tomorrow?
How can we know? And how will these questions be taken into account in the projects now being planned?
For whom?
To understand how many homes we need, counting people is not enough. We also need to count households.
The number of households can increase even when the population does not. And when the population grows, pressure on housing can be greater still.
When a relationship ends, one home may need to become two. This happens with divorces, but not only then. Many people live together without formally registering their relationship, yet when they separate, they may need two homes instead of one.
Someone who starts living alone may also need a home of their own, where previously one home was shared by several people. And as we live longer, people need somewhere to live for more years, often with specific requirements for accessibility and proximity to services.
There are also the people arriving in Portugal. The resident population has grown in recent years as people from other countries have moved here. This is a trend seen elsewhere in Europe and one that has fuelled intense public debate. Whatever one's views on the subject, the arithmetic is straightforward: more people living in the same territory need more places to live.
But building more homes is not enough. We need to think about different homes for different needs. Someone living alone does not necessarily need the same type of property as a family of four. As people grow older, they may need accessible homes, medical care and services nearby.
Geography matters too.
The Barómetro das Cidades (Cities Barometer), published by the Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos on 29 September, shows that priorities vary according to location. In the metropolitan areas, housing stands out among people's concerns. In inland cities, around half of those surveyed identify employment as a priority. The same study shows that inland cities have older populations — one third of residents are aged 65 or over — while medium-sized cities along the coast, outside the metropolitan areas, have younger and more highly educated populations.
These findings lead me to think that many younger people continue to look towards the main urban centres, where jobs are concentrated, while some older people may consider moving elsewhere. I do not know to what extent these moves are actually taking place. The survey indicates that only 19% of respondents say they would consider moving to another city. That is a figure worth monitoring, not a conclusion about what people will actually do.
The question remains: are we thinking about the housing people need, or merely about the number of homes we want to build?
Where?
Cities can grow upwards or expand outwards. Neither approach is inherently better or worse than the other. Everything depends on the location, the existing infrastructure, costs, environmental protection, and the ability to provide adequate transport, public services and living conditions.
Building homes without considering what surrounds them solves only part of the problem and potentially creates others that, as a society, we could do without.
Portugal's 2021 Census recorded around 5.97 million conventional dwellings for 10.34 million residents. That is approximately 58 dwellings for every 100 residents, or one dwelling for every 1.73 people.
A purely arithmetic reading might lead us to ask whether we really have a housing problem. Naturally, the answer cannot be found in these figures alone. Beyond the number of dwellings, we need to know where they are, what condition they are in, and how they are used or could be used in the future. We also need to understand the intentions of their rightful owners regarding the management of their property.
The same reasoning applies to property owned by the Portuguese state itself: how many properties are there, where are they located, what could they be used for, and at what cost?
These questions raise another issue that we cannot ignore: is the problem solely one of housing supply, or does it also lie in the way our territory is organised?
Before answering, we need to understand what prevents certain areas from becoming more attractive places to live and work. We need to understand why population, employment and services are concentrated in some areas, while others lose residents and opportunities.
Location, for example, is not a minor detail. It determines access to employment, transport, education, healthcare and the other services we need. A home may exist and yet still fail to provide a solution for someone looking for somewhere to live.
There is also a reality we may have to accept: not everyone will be able to live in major cities, close to employment, cultural activities and the services they need. According to the 2021 Census, the Lisbon and Porto Metropolitan Areas together had around 4.6 million inhabitants — approximately 44.6% of Portugal's population, occupying around 5.5% of the country's territory.
Is it really so unreasonable to consider other locations, provided the conditions for living there are in place?
Places such as Vila Nova da Rainha and Poceirão, or similar locations, may seem unattractive when compared with major urban centres. But the assessment changes if suitable housing, employment, transport and services are available. Location alone solves nothing; equally, the absence of these conditions does not make a location inherently unviable.
This is where the issue becomes more tangible. Increasing supply is a target expressed in numbers. But a home is never built simply "in Portugal". It is built in a specific place, with roads, healthcare facilities, schools and jobs around it — or without them.
The Barómetro das Cidades also points to a strong reliance on private vehicles: 79% of respondents who work or study reported using a car or motorbike for their journeys to work or school/university. Among the obstacles to using public transport, insufficient frequency and poor connections between different services stand out more than price.
This finding also deserves attention. We cannot expect people to stop relying on private vehicles if the alternatives do not allow them to reach work, school or essential services within a reasonable time. Mobility is not a detail to be dealt with after homes have been built. It is part of the housing solution itself.
Limitations
As is often the case with complex, high-profile problems, there is no single answer.
I am not an urban planner, demographer or policymaker, nor do I aspire to become one. I write from what I have observed over fifteen years in the property market and from what I read in sources I consider reliable. I may be interpreting some of the data incorrectly. But the questions seem legitimate to me, and they have practical consequences.
If we are behind schedule, it is natural to want to speed things up. But anyone in a hurry needs to know where they are going and which route to take.
What housing, for whom, and where are not the final destination. They are the starting point. The journey will be long and, probably, turbulent.