As of 2016, housing has never been so topical. Residential, which traditionally has been a relatively low yielding asset class within real estate property types, today looks very attractive in relative terms. This is especially true in countries like THE UNITED KINGDOM, THE NETHERLANDS, GERMANY AND THE NORDIC COUNTRIES and in some gateway cities in Europe which are rich in demographics, technology and urbanization. Some twenty years ago, more than half of institutional holdings were in residential, which still was an attractive sector at the time. These holdings are now virtually sold out, and probably represent less than 10% in terms of institutions, because they have just swapped their properties for commercial real estate. But looking at the last ten years, we see a renewed interest for residential: in both GERMANY and FRANCE, for example, it has actually outperformed other properties, like commercial property. It is clear that the institutional demand is there, but what they are looking for is more stability in income and capital preservation than necessarily rental growth – and the current stresses on affordability and supply means that there are obviously opportunities for investors and developers. To take the example of FRANCE, the pattern is the same both in the residential sector and in the office sector: the rental situation is not exceptional, but the investment outlook is better despite the fact that rent levels are not growing. The paradox is that housing doesn’t focus the attention and the debates among real estate players, whereas housing is the main program of almost any new development. Part of the explanation may be that housing doesn’t offer the best return on investment, and that everyone tends to be focused on iconic architecture, whereas the main housing production is seen as uninteresting, not very innovative and mostly in distant and monotonous suburbs.