Spain builds for students. The Netherlands lets them live at home.

Spain has more than 1.4 million university students and approximately 117,000 professionally managed student beds for the students who need housing outside the parental home. That group is estimated at 622,000. One bed for every five students who need one.

The Netherlands has 333,800 university students and a further 469,600 vocational college students. In total, nearly 1.1 million people are enrolled in Dutch higher and vocational education. Of those who want to live independently, 22% are still living with their parents due to affordability or a shortage of available rooms.

The student housing shortage in the Netherlands currently stands at between 26,000 and 63,000 units, depending on the scenario. According to the National Student Housing Monitor 2024, the shortfall will still exceed 42,000 units in 2032. In 2024, 5,000 new student homes were delivered. At the same time, 9,000 private rooms left the market as landlords sold their properties. Net supply shrank.

Spain has a larger shortage. The Netherlands is solving it more slowly.

International capital is choosing Spain

Investment in Spanish student housing reached approximately €1.7 billion in 2025, an increase of more than 150% year-on-year. One of the largest transactions was the sale of student housing platform Livensa for approximately €1.2 billion. Spain is estimated to need a further 335,000 student beds to approach the average European coverage ratio. The investment required to get there lies between €15 billion and €24 billion.

In the Netherlands, the picture is the reverse. International capital withdrew. In 2022, 32% of all private investment in new Dutch rental housing came from abroad. By 2025, that figure was 1%. The introduction of the Affordable Rent Act, higher transfer taxes and regulatory uncertainty are the primary causes.

The reason capital flows toward Spain is not that the shortage is smaller. It is that the shortage is structural and large enough to scale profitably, and that market conditions make investment viable.

The difference is in how the market defines the product

In Spain's larger cities, student housing is increasingly being developed as a standalone combination of real estate and services. The operator is involved from the design stage. The building, the facilities and the operation are aligned before a permit is applied for.

That produces a fundamentally different product. Not a room with a bed, but a residential formula: shared study and common areas, internet and utilities included, security, cleaning, sports facilities, community management.

In the Netherlands, student housing is still too often treated as standard residential construction with smaller rooms. The operator enters late in the process. The building is already designed. The adjustments are marginal.

Student Experience has operated from the reverse logic for more than 15 years: first the target group, then the product, then the building. That model works in Amsterdam, Leiden, Madrid and Granada. But it has not become the market standard in the Netherlands.

What the Netherlands does instead of building

In 2024-2025, 92,372 international students are enrolled at Dutch universities, representing 16.6% of the total student population. That share grew strongly for years but is now declining: growth in the international student population reached its lowest point in a decade in 2024-2025. The Dutch government is working to manage inflow further through a more selective study migration policy.

The effect of the room shortage is visible in the meantime: more and more students are staying in the parental home. Of the vocational students living at home who would prefer to live independently, 22% are doing so because of affordability or lack of available housing.

That looks like reduced demand on paper. It is deferred independence.

A student living at home travels longer, participates less in student life, has less mobility in choosing a course, and finds it harder to build an independent social network. Students who are looking for housing compete with first-time buyers, labour migrants and young professionals for the same limited supply.

The student housing shortage pushes through into the broader housing market. A building with 500 student beds does not only solve a student problem. It prevents 500 students from occupying regular apartments, rooms and family homes.

The downside of the Spanish approach

The Spanish market has a problem the Netherlands should take seriously before holding it up as a model.

New student complexes in Madrid and Barcelona regularly charge more than €1,000 per month. International students can afford that. Local students risk being priced out, precisely the group the housing was intended for.

More student housing is therefore not automatically affordable student housing.

The solution is a mixed model: compact affordable rooms alongside studios at various price points, shared facilities, long-term agreements with universities on land and operations, and protection of an affordable portion of the supply.

What the Netherlands needs to do differently

The Netherlands should treat student housing much more explicitly as educational infrastructure, not as a residential product that happens to house students.

The National Action Plan for Student Housing targets 60,000 additional student homes by 2030. In the first three years, 15,000 were delivered. Concrete construction plans exist for a further 11,600 units across the 30 largest student cities. That pace is insufficient to close the shortfall of 42,000 units projected for 2032.

Universities cannot attract students without limit while taking no responsibility for housing. Municipalities cannot position themselves as knowledge cities while blocking every major student housing site. And investors will not return if regulation continues to drive them out.

Every major university city should have a dedicated student housing programme: a concrete number of beds required, pre-designated locations, standardised permits, agreements with educational institutions, space for professional operators, and protection of an affordable portion of the supply.

The Spanish model works because investors, operators, universities and municipalities are moving in the same direction. Not perfectly, but in the same direction.

In the Netherlands, they too often move past each other.

The conclusion

Student housing is not a niche. It is one of the fastest ways to make the overall housing market function better.

Spain shows that professionally operated student housing can be scaled, even with a large shortage. The lesson for the Netherlands is not to copy the Spanish model, but to adopt the logic: start with the target group, involve the operator early, treat it as infrastructure, and ensure affordability is not the last consideration added.

The question is not whether the Netherlands wants to build enough for students.

The question is whether it is willing to build the way students want to live.

This is the second article in a series in which TEN compares European housing markets with the Netherlands.

Sources: Kences, National Student Housing Monitor 2024. Dutch Government, Student Housing Progress Letter September 2025. OCW in Figures, Reference Forecast 2026 (333,800 university students). Nuffic, Incoming Degree Mobility 2024-2025 (92,372 international university students, 16.6%). Savills / CBRE, European Student Housing Report 2024-2025. Cushman & Wakefield, Spanish Living Investment Report 2025. Capital Value / ABF Research, Investment Report 2025. Student Experience, operational data 2024 (Amsterdam, Leiden, Madrid, Granada).