EUROPEAN SOCIAL POLICY NETWORK (ESPN)

National strategies to fight

homelessness and housing exclusion

Sweden
Marcus Knutagård, Josephine Heap
and Kenneth Nelson

Social Europe
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION

European Social Policy Network (ESPN)

ESPN Thematic Report on

National strategies to fight
homelessness and housing
exclusion

Sweden

2019

Marcus Knutagård, Josephine Heap and Kenneth Nelson

Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion

2019
The European Social Policy Network (ESPN) was established in July 2014 on the initiative of the
European Commission to provide high-quality and timely independent information, advice,
analysis and expertise on social policy issues in the European Union and neighbouring countries.

The ESPN brings together into a single network the work that used to be carried out by the
European Network of Independent Experts on Social Inclusion, the Network for the Analytical
Support on the Socio-Economic Impact of Social Protection Reforms (ASISP) and the MISSOC
(Mutual Information Systems on Social Protection) secretariat.

The ESPN is managed by the Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER) and
APPLICA, together with the European Social Observatory (OSE).

For more information on the ESPN, see:

http:ec.europa.eusocialmain.jsp?catId=1135&langId=en

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers

to your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone
boxes or hotels may charge you).

LEGAL NOTICE
This document has been prepared for the European Commission, however it reflects the views only of the
authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information
contained therein.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http:www.europa.eu).

© European Union, 2019

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged

Quoting this report: Quoting this report: Knutagård, Marcus, Heap, Josephine and Nelson, Kenneth. (2019).
ESPN Thematic Report on National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion – Sweden,
European Social Policy Network (ESPN), Brussels: European Commission.
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Contents

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 4
1 THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING EXCLUSION ..................... 5
2 RELEVANT STRATEGIES AND POLICIES TACKLING HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING
EXCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 7
3 ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT PATTERNS OF SERVICE PROVISION AND CHALLENGES IN
IMPLEMENTING SWEDEN’S RESPONSES TO HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING EXCLUSION .. 8
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 12
ANNEX .................................................................................................................... 15
Table A1: ETHOS Light categories defined as homeless in Sweden ............................... 15
Table A2: Latest available data on the number of homeless people in Sweden ............... 16

3
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Summary
Homelessness and housing exclusion is an increasing problem in Sweden and in most
European countries. The Swedish definition of homelessness is rather broad and shows
substantial overlap with the ETHOS1 Light definition. Between the first homelessness
count in 1993 and the most recent one in 2017, the number of homeless people doubled.
After 2011 the number of homeless people stabilised, possibly explained by the fact that
fewer municipalities participated in the 2017 count. The 2017 count showed that almost
half of the homeless population lived in long-term housing arrangements. It also showed
an increase in the number of acutely homeless people (i.e. ETHOS Light categories 1, 2,
3 and 5) and a large increase in the number of homeless people within the secondary
housing market. Moreover, the 2017 survey indicated that the profile of the homeless
population had changed. An increasing number of homeless persons were women and an
increasing number had a migrant background. Even though the national definition is
broad, it still excludes several groups that in fact live in homeless situations – people
without a residence permit, unaccompanied minors, undocumented migrants, mobile EU
citizens and people who are placed within different forms of social services institutions
and are entitled by law to support and services. There are also groups of people who find
it more and more difficult to either enter the ordinary housing market or have the
financial means to keep their housing. These groups include older people with care
needs, pensioners with a guarantee pension, youths and young adults, students and
newly arrived migrants.
In comparison with the other Nordic countries, Sweden does not have a national
homelessness strategy. The housing market is highly deregulated. The municipal housing
companies that previously had an important role in the housing market, providing public
rental housing for all citizens, now have to act like other housing companies that are for
profit and based on competitive market principles. A specific Swedish model that has
been developed during the past two decades is now institutionalised: it consists of a
secondary housing market where social services rent housing from municipal or private
actors and then sub-let these apartments to their clients. Outside the secondary housing
market, a hotel and lodging market exists. Many of the services outside the secondary
housing market are delivered by actors other than public organisations. Shelters, hostels,
hotels and other forms of special housing for homeless people are run by non-
government organisations (NGOs), charities, and service-user organisations – both social
enterprises and private companies.
A big driver behind the increase in homelessness and housing exclusion is the lack of
affordable housing. The costs for producing new housing are high, and the rents in newly
produced housing are disconnected from the user value system that exists in the rental
housing market in Sweden. This has caused a dramatic increase in rental costs.
Polarisation and social-spatial segregation have also increased. The refugee crisis in 2015
led to new legislation that forces municipalities to provide housing for newly arrived
migrants. The new legislation has had direct effects on local housing markets. During the
past decade, ‘Housing First’ initiatives have been established and shown positive results,
but the scaling-up process has been slow, with only 20 out of 290 municipalities
providing Housing First services. The issue of housing for economically disadvantaged
households has been among the most important ones. A central debate has been over
whether social housing would be a better approach than the existing model, since the
latter has been shown to be part of the problem rather than a solution to homelessness.

1
European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion.

4
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

1 The nature and extent of homelessness and housing exclusion

The National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen) is responsible, at the national
level, for mapping out the extent and nature of homelessness in Sweden, as well as
outlining strategies to feed this information into action plans for fighting homelessness at
national, regional and local levels. The current definition of homelessness was used for
the first time in the national homelessness survey in 2011. It resembles the definition
used in a previous survey conducted in 2005, but some changes were made. In the
National Board of Health and Welfare's survey from 2011, the ETHOS model was adapted
to the Swedish context (NBHW, 2012, p. 23). Since the current definition uses situations
of homelessness, it resembles the ETHOS Light definition. There have been five national
homelessness surveys in Sweden since 1993 (1993, 1999, 2005, 2011 and 2017). The
definition has changed every time a survey has been conducted. This has complicated
the task of comparing the figures. The methodology of previous national surveys has
been heavily criticised (Sahlin, 1994; Thörn, 2004). The current official national definition
of homelessness in Sweden is divided into four homelessness situations:
1. acute homelessness;
2. institutional or assisted living;
3. long-term living arrangements organised by social services (e.g. the secondary
housing market); and
4. private short-term living arrangements (NBHW, 2017a).
The four situations of homelessness used by the National Board of Health and Welfare
overlap with the ETHOS Light definition. ‘Acute homelessness’ includes people sleeping in
public spaces and those in overnight shelters. It also includes those in accommodation
for homeless people, as well as those living in mobile homes, non-conventional buildings
and temporary structures (i.e. ETHOS Light categories 1, 2, 3 and 5). ‘Institutional or
assisted living’ includes people residing in institutions who lack housing prior to release
(i.e. ETHOS Light category 4). People in ‘long-term living arrangements’ include those
who have been assigned accommodation through the social services. The housing
situation is contractual, and often includes supervision and housing support (this
category has no equivalent in the ETHOS Light definition, but sub-definitions in this
category show some resemblance to the category ‘transitional supported accommodation’
in ETHOS Light category 3).
Almost half of homeless people in the most recent survey lived in different types of long-
term housing (situation 3): 15,838 out of the total of 33,269. The apartments are often
spread out in apartment blocks in the ordinary housing market. Table A1 in the Annex
identifies the categories from the ETHOS Light typology that are used in the Swedish
definition. Notably, it shows that the third situation used in the Swedish definition is not
fully included. The third situation refers to housing that is part of what is called the
secondary housing market. ‘Private short-term living arrangements’ includes people who
reside temporarily with friends and relatives, as well as those with sub-lease contracts of
less than three months (i.e. resembling ETHOS Light category 6, but without the sub-
lease addition).
Table A2 in Annex provides the most recent available data on homelessness in Sweden.
Certain groups are not included in the national definition of homelessness. People who
lack a residence permit are not counted, and nor are unaccompanied minors,
undocumented migrants and mobile EU citizens. Moreover, people who are placed in
different forms of social services institutions are also excluded from the national
definition of homelessness – such as child protection services, retirement homes or
homes for people with functional disabilities (who are entitled to support and service
according to the Swedish Act concerning Support and Service for Persons with Certain
Functional Impairments [Lag (1993:387) om stöd och service till vissa funktionshindrade]
(LSS)). There are also groups of people who find it more and more difficult to either
enter the ordinary housing market or have the financial means to keep their housing.
According to the County Administrative Board (2018) these groups include older people

5
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

with care needs, pensioners with a guarantee pension, youth and young adults, students
and newly arrived migrants.
Homelessness and housing exclusion have increased over the last 10 years. The key
drivers of the growing numbers of homeless people can be traced back to the so-called
system shift in housing policy in the early 1990s (Lindbom, 2001; Sahlin, 2015). The
Swedish housing regime has been described as corporatist (Bengtsson, 2006). The
foundation of the Swedish model has been public housing. A large share of the rental
housing market has traditionally been owned by municipal housing companies. This
arrangement differs from other European countries, which have a system of subsidised
social housing. The trends that can be seen today may therefore be traced back to
different political decisions and pieces of legislation that have led to a highly deregulated
housing market.
There is a housing shortage in 240 out of 290 municipalities in Sweden (NBHBP, 2019).
The housing production rate has been low in relation to population growth since the
beginning of the 1990s, despite increasing significantly during the last few years. Newly
produced housing is expensive, so that even where is housing available, its cost makes it
impossible for certain groups to access it. Another important factor derives from the
2011 legislation stating that municipal housing companies have to be run according to
business principles and for profit (Sahlin, 2017). For many citizens it is a challenge to
enter the ordinary housing market because they are not accepted as tenants. About 15%
of municipal housing companies and 30% of private housing companies do not accept
social benefits as a steady income. According to the National Board of Housing, Building
and Planning (NBHBP, 2017) one-fifth of housing companies have an income requirement
of three times the annual rent. Many housing companies refuse people who have rent
debts and/or payment notices.
The profile of the homeless population has changed since the first survey in 1993, as
follows.
• In 1993, 83% of the homeless population were men and 17% women. In the
most recent survey (from 2017), 62% were men and 38% women.
• In 1993, 76.7% of the homeless population were Swedish and 23.3% had a
migrant background. In 2017, 57% were Swedish and 43% had a migrant
background (for a more elaborate comparison between the different surveys, see
Knutagård, 2018).
Due to the changes in the definition of homelessness, the data are not fully comparable,
which needs to be taken into consideration when discussing the changing profile. In
addition, the survey is conducted during one week in spring. The number of homeless
people therefore refers to those who were homeless during that specific week. The data
do not say anything about how many people are homeless during a longer period, so the
available data cannot provide definitive insights into homelessness trajectories or the
dynamics of homelessness. Nevertheless, by comparing the different surveys it is
possible to see that there has been a rather big change in the profile concerning gender
and migrant background.
Additionally, the 2017 survey showed an increase in the number of individuals who were
acutely homeless, and a large increase of the number of people in long-term housing
solutions. The 2017 survey also showed that 48% of homeless women and 29% of
homeless men were parents to children aged 18 and younger. The average age of
homeless men was 41 and the average age of homeless women was 39. The National
Board of Health and Welfare also noted an increase in the number of homeless people
who were aged 65 or older. In 2017, 1,800 individuals aged 65+ were reported – an
increase of roughly 300 since the 2011 survey (NBHW 2017a). A large share (over two-
thirds) of the homeless population had been homeless for one year or more. The results
from the survey also showed that more than 3,000 homeless (10%) individuals had been
homeless for 10 years or longer.

6
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

2 Relevant strategies and policies tackling homelessness and

housing exclusion
In 2007, the government launched a national homelessness strategy called
Homelessness, Multiple Faces, Multiple Responsibilities – A Strategy to Combat
Homelessness and Exclusion from the Housing Market. The ambition was high but the
strategy only lasted until 2009. Sweden has not had a national homelessness strategy
since then. The evaluation of the national homelessness strategy concluded that it failed
to meet the four set objectives (Denvall et al., 2011). Nonetheless, two areas that
showed positive results were support work to prevent evictions and different forms of
budget and debt counselling.
There are no national or regional strategies at the time of writing. This is a big difference
compared with neighbouring countries. In Sweden, municipalities have the main
responsibility for the provision of housing for their citizens. The housing market has
changed since the beginning of the 1990s, and the composition of local housing providers
varies greatly. In some municipalities, municipal housing companies still play a big role
and have a large share of rental housing. Other municipalities have sold the municipal
housing companies and rely instead on private landlords and home-ownership.
Many municipalities, however, have launched their own municipal housing strategies and
action plans to combat homelessness. Long-term housing solutions are often formulated
as a main objective with a strong focus on preventive work, especially in relation to
evictions. In the homelessness strategy for the city of Stockholm, the use of evidence-
based methods is also stated as a goal. In several municipal homelessness action plans,
Housing First is put forward as a strategy. Pathways to Housing, a non-profit corporation
in New York, first developed the Housing First programme in 1992. The Housing First
model is based on eight core principles.2 It starts from the idea that homeless people
need housing first before any other problems can be dealt with. Housing is a prerequisite.
The homeless person also receives support services from a multi-professional support
team, either an ACT team (assertive community treatment) or an ICM team (intensive
case management). The housing is scattered within the regular housing market and the
support team is on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week (Knutagård & Kristiansen,
2013; Pleace, 2016). The scaling-up of Housing First services is evident in municipalities
such as Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö and Helsingborg. One challenge is to scale up
the support teams necessary at the same pace as the provision of housing. Research has
shown that in municipalities that have introduced Housing First services, there is a strong
discourse on housing retention and tenancy sustainment (Knutagård & Kristiansen,
2018). In practice, the staircase model (described below, Section 3) or service-led
strategies are still dominant. Another challenge regards market conditions, which place a
responsibility on the individual to make the right decisions and to be an active consumer
in the market. There is a risk that homelessness will come to be seen as an individual
problem, and framed as if homeless people themselves have not made enough effort to
find housing – either with another landlord, in another city or in a totally different region
in the country (Juhila et al., 2017).
EU funding has not played a major role in enhancing homelessness responses in Sweden
related to the national definition of homelessness. During the ongoing programme period,
the focus has been on employability and there have not been any specific projects funded
by the European Social Fund (ESF) directly targeting homelessness and housing
exclusion. Some funding from the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD)
has been useful for targeting mobile EU citizens.

2
The eight principles are: (1) housing as a basic human right; (2) respect, warmth and compassion for all
clients; (3) a commitment to working with clients for as long as they need; (4) scattered-site housing,
independent apartments; (5) separation of housing and services; (6) consumer choice and self-determination;
(7) a recovery orientation; and (8) harm reduction (Tsemberis, 2015, p. 18).

7
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

The National Board of Health and Welfare is responsible for monitoring homelessness at
the national level in Sweden. In its assessments, EU indicators on housing are not used.
However, a lack of rental housing and the often harsh conditions attached to being
approved as tenant (i.e. requirements for regular work income) are important structural
factors that pose barriers for some homeless people to find suitable housing, as noted by
the Board in its communications on homelessness and evictions (NBHW, 2017b). Failure
to pay rent is mentioned in some municipal investigations on homelessness (Borås Stad,
2018; Malmö Stad, 2018).
The refugee crisis after 2015 has also had direct effects on local housing markets. In
2015 more than 160,000 people sought asylum in Sweden. New legislation (SFS
2016:38. The Act on reception for settlement of certain newly arrived immigrants) forces
municipalities to provide housing for newly arrived migrants. The government funds the
first two years of the establishment phase and after that the municipalities take over the
financial costs. This has led to competition between groups of homeless people and other
groups that find it difficult to access the housing market.

3 Analysis of the current patterns of service provision and

challenges in implementing Sweden’s responses to
homelessness and housing exclusion
The mainstream approach to homelessness services in Sweden is still based on the so-
called ‘staircase model’ or ‘continuum of care’. The logic behind the staircase model is
that clients are expected to prove that they are housing-ready by being sober, abstinent
from drugs and participating in treatment for any addiction or mental health problems, in
order to move on to the next step (Knutagård, 2009; 2018). Abstinence and accepting
treatment are prerequisites in order to progress on the staircase. An independent
apartment becomes an end goal, rather than a means to social integration. Research has
shown that it is very difficult to exit the staircase model at the top (Löftsrand, 2005;
Knutagård, 2009). Many homeless clients cannot comply with all the rules in the different
housing arrangements, which leads to failure and exclusion from the programme,
meaning that they have to start climbing all over again. To exit the staircase model
successfully takes time and people have to move from one housing arrangement to
another in order to progress. Very few enter the ordinary housing market. According to
the National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (2014) only 7.8% of tenants with a
municipal (social) contract within the secondary housing market could sign a ‘first-hand
contract’ (a signed agreement with the landlord) during the year. In 2008 there were
11,270 municipal or social contracts given to homeless households; and in January 2019
there were approximately 26,100 municipal contracts (NBHBP, 2019; Sahlin, 2017).
The responsibility for the provision of housing lies at the municipal level. This has made
social services an important landlord in the housing market. Most municipalities have
established a so-called secondary housing market. Outside this market, there is a hotel
and lodging market that consists of other forms of housing options, ranging from night
shelters to category housing (congregate housing) and training flats. Shelters are funded
by public funds but they can be run by either municipalities, non-government
organisations (NGOs), service-user organisations or private companies. Night shelters
are often run by NGOs such as the City Mission or the Salvation Army. There are a few
night shelters with direct access from the streets (with a queuing system), but a majority
today operate and distribute sleeping quarters on referral from social services. To get
access to these shelters people must have Swedish citizenship, or alternatively a
permanent or temporary residence permit. Consequently, EU migrants, for example, are
denied shelter. In some cities, the authorities have provided temporary emergency
winter shelters in cooperation with NGOs or churches. There are also a few permanent
shelters run by local NGOs.
It is important to note that there is a huge variety of services provided in the 290
municipalities. Large cities and municipalities will have the broadest range of services;

8
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

whereas small towns and municipalities will have very few services, and often have to
buy services from other municipalities (this variation is presented in more detail in Pleace
et al. (2018)). In the larger cities, there is a greater variety of housing options, from
ordinary apartments to night shelters. These cities are able to provide special healthcare
services, as well as different forms of activities and social integration projects.
Many municipalities have assigned staff to work on preventing evictions. Social services
have a special responsibility for following up evictions where children are affected.
According to Kronofogden (Swedish Enforcement Authority), the number of enforced
evictions that involved children increased by 17.1% between 2017 (211 evictions) and
year 2018 (247 evictions) (see Figure 1). There are big variations between the different
municipalities. Malmö, the third largest city in Sweden, had the highest number of
evictions in 2018. Research has shown that most evictions are caused by rent arrears. It
has also shown that evictees are most often poor – more than half have no income from
the labour market, and two-thirds received social assistance (von Otter et al., 2017).
However, only 6% of all applications for eviction lead to an enforced eviction. There is
currently very little knowledge that can clarify whether households manage to retain their
leases or if they are informally or formally forced to move out before they are formally
evicted (ibid.). According to Kronofogden, in 2018 almost 86% of all enforced evictions
that affected children were carried out because of rent arrears. In 38% of the enforced
evictions, rental arrears were less than SEK 10,000 (€929). Eviction is clearly a barrier to
re-enter the housing market, but research has also shown that an even bigger barrier,
and a cause of homelessness, is the problem of not being able to enter the housing
market in the first place (Nordfeldt, 2012).
Figure 1. Number of children affected by enforced eviction in Sweden, 2008-
2018

Source: Kronofogden [Swedish Enforcement Authority] (2018).

One key challenge for many homeless people is a lack of employment (Knutagård, 2019),
which is almost impossible to acquire if the person has addiction or mental health
problems. The profile of the homeless population also differs between different regions,
municipalities and cities. In the city of Malmö, there are more homeless people with a
migrant background; there is also a larger number of women with a migrant background
with children who have lived in Sweden for a short period of time, compared with the
capital Stockholm. In Stockholm, the proportion of homeless migrants is lower and they
have lived in Sweden for a much longer period of time (NBHW, 2017a).
There are also many private companies that rent out temporary accommodation. This
can be everything from hotels and hostels to camping parks, but also flats that are
rented out on a day-to-day basis at a high cost. Some service-user organisations also run
housing alternatives for homeless people. They normally start with collective housing
where the user shares a flat with several others. They are often organised like the
staircase model where the user or member can climb step by step until they can get a

9
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

flat of their own. These organisations are often user-driven and are focused on people
with an addiction.
One challenge is the insufficient monitoring of the effectiveness of the services provided.
In Stockholm, only 22% of homeless persons who were part of the local homelessness
count in 2010 were also reported as homeless in the count done in 2012. This
corresponds well with research that shows a large turnover among people experiencing
homelessness. A relatively small number of people stay homeless for a very long time.
There is, however, a general lack of data concerning the effectiveness of the existing
system. It would be of great interest from a research perspective if it were made easier
to collect data on homelessness trajectories, and to have access to data that show how
different housing arrangements lead to long-term housing and exits from homelessness.
There is also a lack of data and monitoring relating to the costs of homelessness, and it
would be very useful to have more longitudinal research on homelessness and a further
development of how to count and measure homelessness. It is six years between the
surveys in Sweden, which makes it rather difficult for municipalities to use the data. A
homelessness survey every second year would make it possible to use the data more
effectively at a local policy level. Many municipalities do their own homelessness counts
every year or every other year, but they also use different definitions from the one
adopted by the National Board of Health and Welfare.
The studies that have been conducted so far on Housing First services show promising
results, not only in terms of very high housing retention rates, but also in the social
integration of formerly homeless persons (Knutagård & Kristiansen, 2018; Uhnoo, 2016;
Folkesson, 2017). One recent study concludes that Housing First is significantly more
efficient for an individual’s recovery than the staircase model (Bothén, 2018).
The lack of affordable housing that homeless people can access is the main problem.
Newly produced rental housing is too expensive for many citizens. The reason behind the
high rental costs is not only production costs, but also the fact that newly produced
housing is exempted from the user value system. So-called presumption rents are valid
during the first 15 years. Not until after that will tenants be able to test the rent against
the value of use. Presumption rents have dramatically increased rental levels.
One method adopted by several municipalities is to try and stimulate vacancy chains in
the housing market. The city of Helsingborg has conducted small mobility pilots that
show some potentially positive results. The idea is to move more affluent households up
the housing ladder, so that more financially vulnerable families or individuals will get
access to affordable homes. The results might help the municipality in their planning for
housing supply. The local housing company has been active in finding ways to relocate
households to newly produced housing, leaving apartments with lower rents behind. This
has been done by subsidising the first few rental payments, and helping with the
practicalities when moving to a new home (Annadotter & Knutagård, 2019). There is very
little research evidence that supports the idea that the construction of new homes leads
to vacancy chains in the housing market. Instead, research shows that vacancies are
filled by households from the same housing market sub-groups (Sands, 1976;
Magnusson-Turner, 2008; Clark, 2013; Rasmusson, Grander and Salonen, 2018). Newly
produced apartments also attract households from other municipalities. This influx cuts
the chain in the municipality where the housing exists, but could create vacancy chains in
the city where the household moves from. The challenge here is that since housing
provision is a municipal responsibility, there is a struggle between municipalities for
affluent households at the same time as municipalities try to prevent less-affluent
households moving into the municipality. This indicates that homelessness and housing
exclusion cannot be dealt with only on a local level, but calls for an integrated strategy
where there is a cooperation on a local, regional and national level.
The main innovation in homelessness services in Sweden has been the introduction of
Housing First services. These are still provided on a small scale. Only 20 municipalities
out of 290 provide Housing First, and in these municipalities it is only used as one
intervention beside the ordinary organisation of homelessness work (Knutagård, 2015).

10
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Another important change is the development of flexible mobile support (both ACT
teams, FACT3 and ICM) and the growing interest in peer-support and the inclusion of
homeless people’s lived experience in the planning and designing of interventions
(Knutagård & Kristiansen, 2018). Many municipalities have housing support services, and
support workers will visit clients in their homes. There is no comprehensive research
showing the efficiency of these services. Research suggests that there is still a need to
provide more flexible mobile support, such as ACT or similar services, and that traditional
housing support often has a strong focus on control.
The recent legislation (SFS 2016:38) that forces municipalities to take on newly arrived
migrants may result in innovative solutions. There is a great risk that some will use
inappropriate housing arrangements, but there are also promising examples where
municipalities have found ways to rapidly house newly arrived migrants in regular
housing. A research project started recently at Lund University, Scanian homes:
Reception, settlement or rejection – homelessness policies and strategies for refugee
settlement, will study the different strategies municipalities take to providing housing,
both for newly arrived migrants, homeless groups and other groups that struggle to enter
the regular housing market.4
Summing up, the results put forward in this report call for the following
recommendations.
• First, it is important to adopt a new integrated homelessness strategy in Sweden
that connects all levels and makes a shift from service-led to housing-led services,
including scaling up the Housing First model.
• Second, an integrated homelessness strategy will have very little effect unless
there is large-scale production of affordable rental housing that citizens can
demand.
• Third, there is a need for increasing the use of the child perspective within social
services in relation to preventing evictions, the type of housing that is provided
and how support is designed and delivered. There is also room for improvement
concerning listening to homeless children’s stories and lived experiences.
• Fourth, there is also a need for a better monitoring of the effectiveness of existing
services.

3
Flexible assertive community treatment.
4
https://www.soch.lu.se/en/research/research-projects/scanian-homes-reception-settlement-or-rejection.

11
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

References
Annadotter, K. & Knutagård, M. (2019). Det bostadssociala programmet i Helsingborg.
Hur samarbetar Helsingborgs stad, AB Helsingborgshem och stadens privata
fastighetsägare för att lösa bostadsbehovet för människor som står utanför den
ordinarie bostadsmarknaden? Lund och Stockholm: KTH Institutionen för Fastigheter
och byggande Avdelningen för Bygg- och fastighetsekonomi och Lunds universitet,
Socialhögskolan.
Bengtsson, B. (2006). Sverige – kommunal allmännytta och korporativa särintressen
[Sweden – municipal housing and corporate special interest], in: Bengtsson, B.
Annaniassen, E., Jensen, L., Ruonavaara, H. and Sveinsson, J.R. (eds) Varför så olika?
Nordisk bostadspolitik i jämförande historiskt ljus [Why so Different? Nordic Housing
Policy in a Comparative and Historical Perspective]. Malmö: Égalité.
Borås Stad (2018). Kartläggning av hemlöshet i Borås 2018. Borås Stad.
Bothén, L. (2018). Comparing the effect of Housing First against the Staircase Model on
recovery. Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet.
Clark, E. (2013). Boendets nyliberalisering och sociala polarisering i Sverige. Fronesis,
(42-42): 151-170.
County Administrative Board (2018). Bostadsförsörjning mer än bostadsbyggande
[Housing supply more than housing construction]. Rapport 2018:3. County
Administrative Board.
Denvall, V., Granlöf, S., Knutagård, M., Nordfeldt, M. and Swärd, H. (2011). Utvärdering
av ‘Hemlöshet – många ansikten, mångas ansvar’ [Evaluation of ‘Homelessness: Many
Faces, Many People’s Responsibility’]. Final report. Lund: Socialhögskolan.
Folkesson, P. (2017). Bostad först i Karlstad. Karlstad: Karlstad universitet.
Juhila, K., Raitakari, S. and Hall, C. (eds) (2017). Responsibilisation at the margins of
welfare services. Abingdon: Routledge.
Knutagård, M. (2009). Skälens fångar. Hemlöshetsarbetets organisering,
kategoriseringar och förklaringar [Prisoners of Reasons: Organisation, Categorisations
and Explanations of Work with the Homeless]. Malmö: Égalité.
Knutagård, M. (2015). Bostad först som strategi eller strategisk strimma [Housing First
as Strategy or Strategic Streak], Alkohol & Narkotika (4) pp.12-15.
Knutagård, M. (2018). Homelessness and Housing Exclusion in Sweden. European
Journal of Homelessness, 12(2), 103-119.
Knutagård, M. (2019). Ekonomiskt bistånd och hemlöshet. I: Hjort, Torbjörn (ed.) Det
yttersta skyddsnätet. Om arbete med socialbidrag. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Knutagård, M. & Kristiansen, A. (2013). Not by the Book: The Emergence and Translation
of Housing First in Sweden. European Journal of Homelessness, 7 (1): 93-115.
Knutagård, M. & Kristiansen, A. (2018). Nytt vin i gamla läglar: Skala upp Bostad först,
boendeinflytande och om att identifiera och stötta ‘the missing hero’. Lund: School of
Social Work, Lund University.
Kronofogden [Swedish Enforcement Authority] (2018). Barn berörda av avhysning 2018
[Children affected by displacement 2018]. (Available in Swedish at:
https://www.kronofogden.se/download/18.154378ad168e08466a7bf9/155058894130
4/Barn_2018.pdf.)
Lindbom, A. (2001). Dismantling Swedish Housing Policy, Governance, 14(4) pp.503-
526.

12
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Löfstrand, C. (2005). Hemlöshetens politik. Lokal policy och praktik. Doktorsavhandling.

Malmö: Égalité.
Magnusson-Turner, L. (2008). Who Gets What and Why? Vacancy Chains in Stockholm's
Housing Market, European Journal of Housing Policy, 8(1) pp.1-19.
Malmö Stad (2018). Hemlöshetskartläggning 2018. Malmö Stad.
NBHBP (2014). Uppföljning av den sekundära bostadsmarknaden 2013. De sociala
hyreskontraktens kvantitativa utveckling åren 2008–2013. [Follow-up of the
secondary housing market in 2013. The quantitative development of the social leases
in 2008–2013]. Karlskrona: Boverket.
NBHBP (2017). Hyresvärdars krav på blivande hyresgäster. [Landlord's requirements for
prospective tenants]. Stockholm: National Board of Housing, Building and Planning.
NBHBP (2019). Bostadsmarknadsenkäten 2019. [Housing market survey 2019].
Stockholm: National Board of Housing, Building and Planning. (Available in Swedish
at:
https://www.boverket.se/sv/samhallsplanering/bostadsmarknad/bostadsmarknaden/b
ostadsmarknadsenkaten.)
NBHW (2012). Hemlöshet och utestängning från bostadsmarknaden 2011 – omfattning
och karaktär [Homelessness and Exclusion from the Housing Market 2011 – Extent
and Character]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare.
NBHW (2017a). Hemlöshet 2017: omfattning och karaktär [Homelessness 2017: Extent
and Character]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare. (English version
available at:
https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Lists/Artikelkatalog/Attachments/20990/2018-6-
19.pdf.)
NBHW (2017b). Stöd för socialtjänsten i arbetet med att förebygga avhysningar [Support
for the social services in the work of preventing evictions]. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Nordfeldt, M. (2012). A Dynamic Perspective on Homelessness. Homeless Families in
Stockholm. European Journal of Homelessness, 6(1), s. 105-123.
von Otter, C., Bäckman, O., Stenberg, S-Å., and Qvarfordt Eisenstein, C. (2017).
Dynamics of Evictions: Results from a Swedish Database. European Journal of
Homelessness, 11(1): 1-23.
Pleace, N. (2016). Housing First Guide Europe. Housing First Europe. (Available at:
https://housingfirsteurope.eu/assets/files/2017/03/HFG_full_Digital.pdf.)
Pleace, N., Baptista, I., Benjaminsen, L. and Busch-Geertsema, V. (2018). Homelessness
Services in Europe, Brussels: FEANTSA: (Available at:
https://www.feantsaresearch.org/public/user/Observatory/Feantsa-
Studies_08_v02[1].pdf.)
Rasmusson, M., Grander, M. and Salonen T. (2018). Flyttkedjor: En litteraturöversikt
över befintlig forskning om bostadsflyttkedjor. Tillväxt- och regionplaneförvaltningen,
Stockholms Läns Landsting. (Available in Swedish at:
http://hdl.handle.net/2043/27027.)
Sahlin, I. (1994). Den svårmätta hemlösheten. Ett diskussionsunderlag om förhållandet
mellan hemlöshet, institutioner och definitioner [Difficulties in homelessness
measurement. A discussion paper on the relationship between homelessness,
institutions and definitions]. Stencil. Lund: Sociologiska institutionen, Lunds
universitet.
Sahlin, I. (2015). Searching for a Homeless Strategy in Sweden, European Journal of
Homelessness, 9(2) pp.161-186.

13
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Sahlin, I. (2017). Bostadsmarknad, bostadspolitik och hemlöshet. [Housing Market,

Housing Policy, and Homelessness]. In Swärd, H. (ed.) Den kantstötta välfärden.
Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Sands, G. (1976). Housing Turnover: Assessing Its Relevance to Public Policy. Journal of
the American Institute of Planners, 42(4): 419-426.
SFS 1993:387. The Swedish Act concerning Support and Service for Persons with Certain
Functional Impairments (LSS) [Lag (1993:387) om stöd och service till vissa
funktionshindrade].
SFS 2016:38. Lag om mottagande av vissa nyanlända invandrare för bosättning. [Act on
reception for settlement of certain newly arrived immigrants]. (Available in Swedish
at: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-
forfattningssamling/lag-201638-om-mottagande-av-vissa-nyanlanda_sfs-2016-38.)
Thörn, C. (2004). Kvinnans plats(er): bilder av hemlöshet [The woman's place(s):
images of homelessness]. Diss. Stockholm: Égalité.
Tsemberis, S. J. (2015). Housing First: The Pathways Model to End Homelessness for
People with Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders. Revised and updated for
DSM-5 edition. Center City, Minnesota: Hazelden.
Uhnoo, S. (2016). Utvärdering av Bostad först Göteborg. Göteborg: Göteborgs
universitet, Institutionen för sociologi och arbetsvetenskap.

14
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Annex

Table A1: ETHOS Light categories defined as homeless in Sweden

Operational Defined as homeless in
Living situation Definition
category Sweden

1 People living 1 Public space/ Living on the streets or Yes, the category ‘acute
rough external space public spaces without a homelessness’ includes this
shelter that can be definition.
defined as living
quarters
2 People in 2 Overnight shelters People with no place of Yes, the category ‘acute
emergency usual residence who homelessness’ includes this
accommodation move frequently definition.
between various types
of accommodation
3 People living in 3 Homeless hostels Where the period of Yes, the category ‘acute
accommodation stay is time-limited and homelessness’ includes
for the homeless 4 Temporary no long-term housing is these definitions, except for
accommodation provided ‘transitional supported
accommodation’. The latter
5 Transitional more resembles the
supported category ‘long-term living
accommodation arrangements’, and its sub-
component ‘temporary
6 Women’s shelter accommodation’.
or refuge
accommodation
4 People living in 7 Healthcare Stay longer than Yes, the category ‘institution
institutions institutions needed due to lack of or assisted living’ includes
housing these definitions. No housing
available within 3 months
8 Penal institutions No housing available prior to discharge.
prior to release
5 People living in 9 Mobile homes Where the Yes, these definitions are
non-conventional accommodation is used included in ‘acute
dwellings due to 10 Non-conventional due to a lack of homelessness’, but defined
lack of housing buildings housing and is not the as a sub-category of living in
person’s usual place of a ‘tent, vehicle, trailer, or
11 Temporary residence cabin’.
structures
6 Homeless people 12 Conventional Where the Yes, the category ‘private
living temporarily housing, but not accommodation is used short-term living
in conventional the person’s usual due to a lack of arrangements’ includes this
housing with place of residence housing and is not the definition. The Swedish
family and person’s usual place of category ‘private short-term
friends (due to residence living arrangements’ is
lack of housing) broader as it also includes
sub-lease contracts of short
duration; it should be
shorter than 3 months and
the person can stay with
people other than family or
friends.

15
National strategies to fight homelessness and housing exclusion Sweden

Table A2: Latest available data on the number of homeless people in

Sweden
Operational Most recent Period
Living situation Source
category number covered

1 People living 1 Public space/ 1. 647 people 3-9 April The national
rough external space 2017 mapping of
homelessness in
Sweden, (NBHW,
2017a)
2 People in 2 Overnight 2. 1,229 people 3-9 April NBHW (2017a)
emergency shelters 2017
accommodation
3 People living in 3 Homeless hostels 3. 1,903 people 3-9 April NBHW (2017a)
accommodation 2017
for the homeless 4 Temporary 4. 1,325 people
accommodation

5 Transitional 5. Long-term living

supported arrangements=15,838
accommodation persons (closest
equivalent to
transitional supported
accommodation). Out
of this number, 1,036
persons have a ‘short-
term’ contract.

6 Women’s shelter 6. 464 people

or refuge
accommodation
4 People living in 7 Healthcare 7. 4,194 people 3-9 April NBHW (2017a)
institutions institutions 2017

8 Penal institutions 8. 705 people

5 People living in 9 Mobile homes 9. 343 people in NBHW (2017a)
non- tents, cars, caravans,
conventional camping sites
dwellings due to
lack of housing 10 Non-conventional 10. See item 9 above
buildings

11 Temporary 11. See item 9 above

structures
6 Homeless people 12 Conventional 12. 4,364 people 3-9 April NBHW (2017a)
living housing, but not +temporary sub-lease 2017
temporarily in the person’s of less than three
conventional usual place of months in other
housing with residence persons’ homes: 802
family and people
friends (due to +temporary lodgers in
lack of housing) other persons’ homes:
560 people

16