1 Introduction

The field of housing studies is expanding rapidly, with an increasing volume of research dedicated to understanding various aspects of housing markets, policies, and social implications. As this body of literature grows, it becomes imperative to systematically analyze and synthesize the wealth of information available. Traditional literature reviews have long served as a vital tool for synthesizing and evaluating this expanding body of work. For example, Dunn (2000) reviews existing literature on housing and health and finds little work explicitly investigating housing as a factor in the social production of health inequalities. Leung (2004) reviews a selective survey of small but nascent research focused on interplay between the housing markets and macro economy. Koch et.al. (2019) review trends in real estate image analysis and investigate the potential of image analysis for the real estate sector. These reviews provide qualitative insights, offering a narrative summary and critical assessment of existing research. However, given the sheer volume and complexity of contemporary housing literature, traditional methods alone may fall short in capturing the full scope and nuanced patterns within the field.

This is where bibliometric analysis becomes essential. Unlike traditional literature reviews, which are inherently qualitative, bibliometric analysis employs quantitative techniques to systematically examine large datasets of scholarly publications. This approach not only catalogs existing studies but also provides a robust framework for identifying research trends, influential publications, and key institutions through statistical and computational methods. It offers several advantages over traditional literature reviews. It enables the identification of emerging research areas and knowledge gaps with precision, guiding future research efforts more effectively. By analyzing citation networks, co-authorship patterns, and keyword occurrences, bibliometric analysis reveals intricate relationships and trends that may not be apparent through qualitative review alone. This method also helps in recognizing the most impactful works, contributors, and institutions, thereby elucidating the foundational theories and methodologies that shape the field.

In housing studies, the application of bibliometric analysis is particularly crucial although it is rare. It enhances the efficiency and comprehensiveness of research synthesis, ensuring that the academic and policy discourse is informed by a detailed, data-driven understanding of the literature. By complementing traditional literature reviews with bibliometric insights, researchers and policymakers can navigate the vast landscape of housing studies more effectively, fostering informed decision-making and innovative solutions to contemporary housing challenges. However, there is few bibliometric analysis in the housing field. This paper tries to fill the gap by analyzing a dataset of 25,662 articles, presenting a most exhaustive review of housing literature.

We proceed as follows. Initially, we delve into a comprehensive review of previous literature pertaining to housing studies. Subsequently, we provide an exposition of the data employed, accompanied by an elucidation of our methodology, which prominently features bibliometric analysis. Following this, we present our findings and engage in insightful discussions. To conclude, we reiterate the key results and underscore their policy implications.

2 Literature review

To identify the trends of research in need of particular attention, many scholars have examined a wide array of housing research over the past decades. For example, Dunn (2000) reviews the existing literature on housing and health, and finds little work explicitly investigating housing as a factor in the social production of health inequalities. Evans-Cowley and Lawhon (2003) discuss the effects of impact fees on the price of housing and land. Varady and Walker (2003) summarize the effects of housing vouchers. Evans et al. (2003) review existing research on housing and mental health and discuss methodological and conceptual shortcomings of the literature. Leung (2004) studies the interplay between the housing markets and macro economy. Kleinhans (2004) provides a review of research into the actual consequences of diversification on five specific issues: housing quality and area reputation, neighborhood-based social interactions, residential attitudes towards social mix, the role-model effect, and problem dilution. Nguyen (2005) examines whether affordable housing detrimentally affects property values. Mueller and Tighe (2007) analyze the effect of affordable housing on community health and education outcomes. Addis et al. (2009) review articles of the health, social care and housing needs of older lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender adults. Tighe (2010) discusses how attitudes toward affordable housing are likely shaped by factors that influence other social policy attitudes. Deng et al. (2011) review the existing literature on China’s housing policy and its housing finance system. Wardrip (2011) summarizes studies exploring the ways in which public transit has been shown to influence housing costs for owners and renters. Read and Tsvetkova (2012) examine the negative social consequences caused by failing to provide affordable housing for low and moderate-income households. Lens (2013) reviews the literature on the relationship between subsidized housing and crime. Tummers (2016) reviews co-housing studies to identify major themes and research gaps. Most case studies report active and diverse communities, creating and maintaining affordable living environments, although small quantitative evidence to substantiate the claims. Casas et al. (2016) review the cross-discipline literature on violent crime in destination neighborhoods post relocation. They summarize that modern housing relocation programs may not improve safety in relocating communities. Romero et al. (2017) review the existing literature about pest management strategies for bed bugs in multiunit housing and report that integrated pest management approaches can lead to significant reductions in bed bug incidence and density comparing to insecticide reliant approaches. Patino and Siegel (2018) review the articles documenting indoor environmental quality in social housing and find that high exposure to PM2.5 and poor thermal comfort were common issues reported. Lee and Van Zandt (2019) analyze the differences in housing needs faced by renters and owners during and after a disaster. The most recent relevant literature analysis is Sanchez (2020), analyzing the topics that the urban planning scholarship cited most frequently.

In summary, there is several housing literature review articles on various topics, which inspires insightful ideas for researchers. However, there remains a notable absence of a comprehensive and updated overview of the whole housing field.

3 Data and method

Bibliometrics offers a robust, visual and quantitative methodology for encapsulating trends in publication within designated fields of research (Garfield, 1970; Pritchard, 1969). This analytical tool can elucidate the temporal progression of academic contributions, the geographic and institutional distribution of publications, collaborative scientific efforts, and principal currents in research domains (Li et al., 2017; Peng & Ye, 2021; Wu et al., 2022, 2023). Additionally, bibliometric network analyses such as co-word analysis (Ding et al., 2001), co-citation analysis (He & Hui, 2002), co-authorship analysis (Glänzel & Schubert, 2004), and co-publication analysis (Schmoch & Schubert, 2008), provide a framework for examining interconnections among keywords, nations, research institutions, and authors within the scholarly landscape.

For our investigation, we compiled a dataset from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), as provided by the Web of Science. The query term ‘housing’ was employed to aggregate publications that included this term within their title, abstract, or keywords over the span of 1993 to 2022. To refine our inquiry specifically to housing-related research, as distinct from civil engineering, we applied filters to our search, restricting the inclusion to articles within six categories: Urban Studies, Economics, Regional & Urban Planning, Geography, Development Studies, and Transportation. This bibliometric search yielded a total of 25,662 articles. After this retrieval, we extracted detailed bibliographic information for each article, encompassing author names and their affiliations, the categorization of subjects, journal titles, types of publications, years of publication, and the keywords utilized.

After data acquisition, we clean the dataset by making synonymous keywords identical and dropping general descriptive terms. For the bibliometric analysis, we utilized the “Bibliometrix” R package (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017) alongside VOSviewer (Van Eck and Waltman, 2010). The latter incorporates natural language processing techniques that facilitate the construction of co-occurrence networks from English-language text corpora. Furthermore, VOSviewer is equipped with cutting-edge methodologies for network visualization and clustering algorithms, enhancing the analytical framework for interpreting complex bibliometric data.

4 Results and discussion

Our analysis emphasizes on the following dimensions of housing research: characteristics of article outputs, major journals, geographic distribution of publications, institution collaboration network, most cited papers, keywords analysis, and housing research related to COVID-19.

4.1 Characteristics of article outputs

During the period from 1993 to 2022, a total of 25,662 publications focusing on housing research were identified. The distribution and characteristics of these publications are detailed in Fig. 1 and Table 1. An analysis of the temporal pattern indicates an increase in the annual number of publications from 310 in 1993 to 2,257 in 2022, reflecting a significant growth trajectory in housing research over the last three decades. The computed average annual growth rate for publications within the Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) related to housing was 6.84%. Notably, this rate of growth has shown an acceleration post-2008.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Growth of publication outputs. (Horizontal axis: year; Vertical axis: number of publications)

Full size image
Table 1 Scientific output descriptors, 1993–2022
Full size table

The data indicates a rise in the average count of authors and citations per publication within the domain of housing research. Specifically, the average number of authors per publication escalated from 1.506 in 1993 to 2.535 in 2022, as presented in Table 1. Concurrently, the average number of references cited per publication increased from 20.845 in 1993 to 55.388 in 2022. The augmentation in reference count signifies an expanding body of knowledge within the housing research sector. Simultaneously, the increase in the average number of authors per article reflects a trend towards greater collaborative efforts in the field.

4.2 Major journals

Within the corpus of housing research, the twenty journals exhibiting the highest levels of scholarly output are delineated in Table 2. This measure of productivity is predicated on the aggregate number of articles each journal has disseminated in the database. Housing Studies emerges as the most prolific journal, followed by Urban Studies and Housing Policy Debate. Given their explicit focus on housing topics, the substantial publication volumes from Housing Studies and Housing Policy Debate are anticipated. Meanwhile, Journal of Urban Economics, International Journal Of Urban And Regional Research, and Energy Policy are distinguished as the trio of journals with the highest citation rates, boasting average citation rates of 46.761, 39.338, and 39.094, respectively. These journals, with their distinctive scopes, target audiences, and specialized subfields, serve as principal outlets for the dissemination of housing-related scholarly works.

Table 2 The 20 most productive journals
Full size table

4.3 Geographic distribution of publications

Figure 2 presents a visual representation of the geographical distribution of the publications, as inferred from the affiliations of the authors. An enumeration of the top ten most prolific countries is provided, categorized according to their total research output, the volume of single-country publications, and the number of internationally collaborative works. Among these leading countries, as depicted in Fig. 2, a majority—specifically six—are located in Europe, two are situated in North America, one is in Australia, and one is in Asia.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Most productive countries (TP, total publications; IP, the number of independent publications by single-country; CP, the number of internationally collaborative publications)

Full size image

The bibliometric analysis indicates that scholars from the United States have contributed the most significant number of articles, amounting to 9,583 publications, followed by the United Kingdom with 4,306 articles, and China with 2,412 articles. In instances where an article was co-authored by researchers from two different countries, it has been counted towards the total for both contributing nations. Additionally, Fig. 2 delineates a higher propensity for international collaboration among scholars from non-native English speaking countries, with Germany exhibiting a collaboration rate of 51.81%, France at 50.97%, China at 43.41%, and the Netherlands at 42.99%.

The co-authorship analysis investigates the collaborative network among principal countries contributing to housing research, as depicted in Fig. 3. The graphical representation uses node size to represent the volume of co-authored publications within a country, and line thickness to illustrate the intensity of collaborative ties between them. The analysis reveals two primary clusters of collaboration: one consisting of European countries, delineated in red, and another comprising Asian and North American countries, marked in green. This configuration positions the United States as a central node in the network of international cooperation, with American scholars showing the most substantial collaborative links with their counterparts in both European and Asian nations.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Co-authorship cooperation between productive countries

Full size image

4.4 Institution collaboration network

Figure 4 employs VOSviewer to illustrate the collaboration network among the seventy most productive research institutions. In this visualization, each node symbolizes an institution, and the spatial proximity between two nodes approximates the degree of their association in terms of co-authorship connections. The nearer two institutions are to each other, the more robust their affiliation is presumed to be. Furthermore, the intensity of co-authorship ties between institutions is indicated by the thickness of the connecting lines. North American institutes are marked in red, while European and other institutes are indicated in green within Fig. 4. As anticipated, institutions on the same continent tend to be geographically closer in the network and exhibit denser interconnections compared to institutions from different continents, suggesting a tendency for greater collaboration within continental clusters.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Institution collaboration network of most 70 central institutions

Full size image

4.5 Most cited papers

Table 3 displays the 20 most highly cited housing research articles. Most of the articles were published on prestigious economics journals, such as Journal of Political Economy, American Economic Review, the Quarterly Journal of Economics, and Econometrica, which implies that economics provides the foundation that housing research was built on. These articles are the strongly recommended reading articles for early-career scholars and graduates who would like to conduct housing research. Those articles can be categorized into two groups. One group is about theoretical models while another group is about methods and housing empirical studies. The theoretical model group includes Alonso (1964) and Muth’s (1969) articles detailing the foundations of the monocentric urban model, and Tiebout’s (1956) classic theory of local public expenditures. Henderson & Ioannides (1983) propose a theoretical model that integrates key economic elements to see how tenure choices are affected. Stein (1995) presents a simple model of trade in the housing market, which has direct implications for the volatility of house prices, as well as for the correlation between prices and trading volume. Iacoviello (2005) develops and estimates a monetary business cycle model with nominal loans and collateral constraints tied to housing values. Wheaton (1990) developed a housing market matching model, in which vacancy rate (fixed in the short run) determines the expected length of sale and search and plays a central role in the reservation prices of buyer and seller.

Table 3 The 20 most cited research articles
Full size table

Among the highly cited methods and housing empirical articles, Rosen’s (1974) classic article on hedonic pricing and Case & Shiller’s (1988) article showing evidence of inertia in housing prices are two of them. Case & Shiller’s (1988) show that a city-wide real log price index change in a given year would be followed by a city-wide real log price index change in the same direction in the subsequent year. Roback (1982) investigated the role of wages and rents in allocating workers to locations with various quantities of amenities. Poterba (1984) suggested that inflation can reduce the effective cost of homeownership and raises the tax subsidy to owner occupation. Saiz (2010) show that most areas in which housing supply is seemed as inelastic are severely land-constrained by their geography, such as steep-sloped terrain. Massey and Denton (1993) show that a simple increase in the rate of minority poverty could result in a dramatic rise in the concentration of poverty in a racially segregated city. They call for measures that can overcome the disadvantages caused by racial discrimination and prejudice in the housing market when initiating policies to solve socioeconomic problems of minorities (Massey & Denton, 1993). Wilson (2012) describes the life of truly disadvantaged groups such as the ghetto underclass in Chicago and recommends a comprehensive public policy agenda to improve. Genesove and Mayer (2001) suggest that housing sellers are averse to realizing nominal losses by setting high asking prices. Black (1999) uses house prices to infer the value parents place on school quality and shows that parents are willing to pay 2.5 percent more for a 5 percent increase in test score. Himmelberg et al. (2005) construct a novel measure for evaluating the cost of home owning-the imputed annual rental cost of owning a home-and apply it to 25 years of history across a wide variety of housing markets to see if there the housing market is unsustainable bubble. Heckman (1979) introduced Heckman correction, a two-step statistical approach, to correct standard errors for non-randomly selected samples. Housing data are nonrandom selected samples and the Heckman correction was commonly applied in the housing empirical studies. Empirical studies in the housing literature take spatial autocorrelation into account. Anselin (2013) comprehensively concluded spatial econometric models and the book become a highly cited reference. Bailey et al. (1963) show that real estate price index can be constructed through a regression method, besides repeated sale method.

4.6 Keyword analysis

4.6.1 Keyword network analysis

The keywords provided by authors constitute a thematic map of the article contents. An analysis was conducted on the co-occurrence relationships among the most frequently occurring 90 keywords, and the resulting co-word networks were graphically represented using VOSviewer software, as shown in Fig. 5. Within this visualization, nodes represent high-frequency keywords, with the node size corresponding to the keyword’s occurrence frequency; the more frequently a keyword appears, the larger the node. Spatial proximity between two keywords in the visualization is indicative of their semantic closeness based on co-occurrence within the literature. Consequently, a shorter distance between two keywords suggests a stronger association. Additionally, the robustness of the co-occurrence links among keywords is visually encoded by the line thickness connecting them.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Co-occurrence network of top 90 high-frequency keywords

Full size image

Figure 5 elucidates that the 90 author keywords with the highest frequency coalesce into three distinct clusters. The red cluster predominantly encompasses topics related to housing policy, while the blue cluster focuses on housing prices and markets. The green cluster primarily involves keywords associated with urban studies and planning. The most recurrent author keywords identified are “Housing price,” “Housing policy,” and “Affordable housing.” Other subjects that feature prominently include “Homeownership,” “Housing Market,” “China,” “Urban Planning,” and “Hedonic model.” The research landscape over the past thirty years also reflects a keen interest in areas such as “Social housing,” “Public housing,” “Neighborhood,” “Gentrification,” “Low-income housing,” “Sustainability,” “Urbanization,” “Mortgage,” “Energy,” “Poverty,” “Migration,” “Mobility,” “Housing markets,” “Segregation,” “Homelessness,” “Residential mobility,” “Spatial econometrics,” “Land use,” “Foreclosure,” “Urban renewal,” and “Monetary policy.”

In the context of thematic interconnections within housing research, the topic of housing policy exhibits a strong association with gentrification, public housing, neighborhood, mobility, social housing, homelessness, affordable housing, displacement, segregation, urban renewal, and housing tenure. The subject of housing price is intimately connected with housing markets, the hedonic model, spatial econometrics, housing supply, housing demand, monetary policy, foreclosures, housing finance, and affordable housing. Urban planning, on the other hand, is closely related to governance, suburbanization, informal settlements, participation, community, climate change, sustainable development, land use, urbanization, built environment, and poverty.

The observed pattern of topic relatedness in Fig. 5 aligns with expectations. Issues such as gentrification, public housing, social housing, homelessness, affordable housing, displacement, segregation, urban renewal, and housing tenure are inherently policy-centric, thus clustering in proximity to the housing policy node. The hedonic model and spatial econometrics are fundamental methodologies in the analysis of housing prices. Additionally, housing markets, housing supply, housing demand, housing finance, and monetary policy are essential considerations in housing price studies, leading these topics to aggregate around the housing price node in Fig. 5.

Urban planning amalgamates housing-related topics from urban perspectives, such as land use, urbanization, governance, suburbanization, participation, community, built environment, and sustainable development, which then group around the urban planning node.

It is significant to note the interdisciplinary nature of housing research, which demonstrates high thematic cohesion not only among the primary topics of housing policy, housing price, and urban planning but also across various secondary topics, indicating a richly interconnected research landscape.

4.7 Temporal evolution of keywords

To delineate the chronological progression of keyword usage throughout the period under scrutiny, the thirty-year span was segmented into three sequential ten-year intervals: 1993–2002, 2003–2012, and 2013–2022. Within Table 4, the top 30 keywords that were most frequently employed in each respective decadal phase are computed and sequentially ordered in Columns (2), (3), and (4). A keyword is designated with a “Rising” trend if its ranking either ascends or remains stable without decline across the three defined intervals of 1993–2002, 2003–2012, and 2013–2022, indicating an escalating focus on that particular keyword and its increasing prevalence in academic discourse. Conversely, if ranking of a keyword descends across the three defined intervals, it is categorized as a “Declining” trend. If a keyword consistently ranks within the top 10 across all three time periods, it is categorized as a “Long-time hotspot “, signifying its sustained prominence as a central theme in housing research literature. If the ranking of a keyword fluctuates and does not have obvious rising or declining pattern, we categorize it as “No obvious pattern”. In Table 4, we use the following color-coding scheme to help identify trends. Dark blue background highlights a long-term hotspot, while light blue background indicates a rising trend. Grey background indicates a declining trend, while no background color indicates no obvious pattern.

Table 4 Temporal evolution of the 30 most frequently used keywords
Full size table

Table 4 demonstrates that several keywords, specifically “Housing price,” “Housing policy,” “Affordable housing,” “Homeownership,” “Housing market,” “Urban planning,” and “Neighborhood,” have consistently maintained their prevalence throughout the past three decades. For instance, the term “Housing price” has sustained a position within the top 10 most frequent keywords from 1993 to 2022. This enduring focus on housing price can be attributed to its significance within housing studies and its status as a principal indicator of the housing market’s health. The keyword “Housing policy” pertains to the strategies and interventions enacted by various stakeholders to influence the housing market, a topic that naturally continues to garner substantial interest as outlined by Schwartz (2014). The persistent attention to “Affordable housing” reflects ongoing challenges in both developing and developed nations to address housing affordability. The keyword “Homeownership” is recognized as a long-standing topic of interest due to its critical role in fostering robust, cohesive communities, evidenced by its contributions to increased civic engagement, enhanced health outcomes, and reduced crime rates.

Table 4 also indicates a surge in the prominence of several keywords, namely “China,” “Gentrification,” “Public housing,” “Social housing,” “Homelessness,” “Migration,” “Urbanization,” “Energy,” “Inequality,” “Land use,” “Gender,” and “Foreclosure,” over the past three decades. For instance, the term “China” experienced a notable ascent in frequency rank, climbing from the 28th position in the 1993–2002 period to the 9th in 2003–2012, and subsequently to the 4th in 2013–2022. This significant rise in ranking can be ascribed to the swift urbanization of Chinese cities and the ensuing challenges as documented by Han et al. (2018), Wu et al. (2018), Li et al. (2020), and Zhang et al. (2020). Another term, “Gentrification,” has increasingly become a focal point of concern, especially in North America since the early 2000s, and is strongly associated with housing renewal, which explains its frequent appearance in academic literature.

Furthermore, certain keywords such as “Foreclosure” and “Monetary policy” were not highly ranked or absent from the list prior to the 2008 financial crisis but gained traction in the aftermath, with their popularity waning as economic recovery ensued. This pattern suggests that the zenith of the U.S. housing bubble, marked by peak housing prices in early 2006, markedly spurred research into the myriad dimensions of actual house prices surpassing fundamental values. Conversely, the downturn of the U.S. housing bubble, which encompassed the subprime mortgage crisis from 2007 to 2009, presented scholars with the opportunity to delve into a spectrum of issues stemming from the housing crisis, including mortgage defaults.

The analysis reveals a decline in the frequency of certain keywords in recent literature. Specifically, “Low-income housing,” “Mobility,” “Development,” and “Residential mobility” have waned in popularity. The diminished usage of “Low-income housing” coincides with an increased prevalence of terms such as “Social housing” and “Urban renewal,” suggesting a possible shift in the lexicon employed by housing researchers to describe government-assisted housing initiatives. This trend may reflect a terminological evolution in the academic discourse surrounding affordable housing programs.

4.8 Housing research related to COVID-19

During the pandemic period of 2020–2022, the keyword “COVID-19” featured in 89 scholarly articles, securing the 10th position in the ranking of keywords. The interconnections among the top 90 high-frequency keywords within these articles were scrutinized, and the resultant co-word networks were depicted using VOSviewer software, as illustrated in Fig. 6. This visualization employs a network of nodes and links, where nodes represent keywords, and the links depict the relationships between these keywords. The size of the nodes reflects the prominence of the keywords, and the color coding distinguishes between different thematic clusters. This figure categorizes the most recurrent author keywords into three different thematic clusters, each representing a core theme within housing studies that pertains to the multifaceted impacts of COVID-19. The blue cluster predominantly addresses the consequences of COVID-19 on mental and physical health, encompassing terms like anxiety, depression, physical activity, resilience, and loneliness. The green cluster focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on consumer behaviors, featuring keywords related to energy consumption, quarantine, and lockdown. Lastly, the red cluster concentrates on the ramifications of COVID-19 on economic and social issues, including housing price, income, poverty, gentrification, gender, migration, and sustainability. The dense network of links illustrates the interconnected nature of housing research topics during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting how various factors and themes are interrelated. In addition, new themes and areas of study have emerged, particularly concerning public health, mental health, and the socio-economic impacts of the pandemic on housing.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Co-occurrence network of top 90 high-frequency keywords in COVID-19 related papers

Full size image

5 Conclusions

Based on a large amount of scholarly articles, this paper reports the progression and transformation of the intellectual terrain of housing research over the past thirty years, spanning from 1993 to 2022. It examines scientific outputs, identify influential articles, journals, pattern of international collaboration, and evolution of research trends. The paper offers the most exhaustive and quantitative review of the housing literature. It also presents an overview of housing studies related to COVID-19.

Overall, housing research has predominantly addressed challenges that have emerged within the evolving housing market, such as the subprime mortgage crisis, with a notable focus on the United States. The U.S. emerges as the most prolific contributor to housing research, succeeded by the United Kingdom and China. Furthermore, a constellation of central themes has persisted over the three-decade timeline—namely, “Housing price,” “Housing policy,” “Affordable housing,” “Homeownership,” “Housing market,” “Urban planning,” and “Neighborhood.” These topics are likely entwined with enduring domestic policies aimed at fostering homeownership. Consequently, housing scholars have dedicated substantial efforts toward supporting initiatives that promote accessible homeownership, which could be significant in the broader dialogue of housing affordability.

Recent scholarly inquiries have increasingly centered on a constellation of keywords, namely “China,” “Gentrification,” “Public housing,” “Social housing,” “Homelessness,” “Migration,” “Urbanization,” “Energy,” “Inequality,” “Land use,” “Gender,” and “Foreclosure.” The research trajectory, as indicated by these topics, suggests an advancing discourse in the development of sustainable housing and communities, characterized by the efficient consumption of resources and energy with minimized environmental impact. The observed trend acknowledges the challenges posed by unchecked development patterns, particularly in Europe and North America, and underscores a proactive stance against the adverse consequences of urban sprawl. These sustainable housing endeavors, particularly in relation to low-income homeownership, are anticipated to become increasingly prominent, guiding future research trajectories over the forthcoming decades. The growing prominence of these topics is potentially linked to the rising advocacy of ‘yes, in my backyard’ (YIMBYism) within the U.S., as well as the expansion of international housing movements that are part of the broader global human rights dialogue. Such movements have garnered heightened scholarly interest in recent years. Concomitantly, this trend signifies a burgeoning focus among researchers on critical social issues, such as inequality, gender, and homelessness, reflecting a responsive and evolving research agenda that aims to address some of the most pressing societal challenges of our time.

The term “COVID-19” emerged as a significant focal point within scholarly research following the onset of the global pandemic in 2020. Researchers have extensively examined the wide-ranging impacts of the COVID-19 crisis from three analytical dimensions: mental and physical health, consumer behavior, and economic and social issues. There is an opportunity for future studies to explore these dimensions in greater depth, with an emphasis on the enduring consequences of the pandemic, the development of recovery frameworks, and the extraction of insights that could be instrumental in navigating forthcoming crises.