The 2nd European Assembly for a Just Building Transition, hosted by Architects 4 Future Germany in Frankfurt (21–23 November 2025), brought together over 15 organisations and initiatives from across Europe working towards a systemic transformation of the building sector. Building on the outcomes of the July 2025 online gathering, this assembly shifted from analysis to action, creating space for 60+ participants to share local struggles, develop shared narratives, and co-create concrete pathways for European collaboration.

House Europe! shared important lessons learned from their journey: strategy cannot be developed by professionals in isolation and then “rolled out” to others. Rather, strategy must emerge collectively, with all stakeholders involved from the beginning.

The atmosphere throughout the assembly was one of shared purpose and solidarity. With many delegates meeting in person after years of online calls, the importance of in-person gatherings was raised multiple times. Key takeaways included

  • Horizontal participation: Multiple local initiatives presenting simultaneously, rather than a top-down agenda.
  • Collective sense-making: Small groups, plenary reflections, and open discussions to build shared understanding
  • Action-oriented outcomes: Concrete commitments emerging from participant priorities, not pre-determined themes

The assembly brought together diverse initiatives spanning housing activism, professional advocacy, direct action, and policy influence:

Additionally, the assembly featured presentations from A4F Group Frankfurt (local context) and Dondorfdruckerei (venue, representing adaptive reuse and squatting heritage).

3 core themes

Discussions converged around 3 themes:

Concrete Action – All participating organisations are engaged with actions in their own context. What can we learn from each other? How can we support these actions and what multiplying effect could occur from collaborating. A4F specifically brought the topic of ‘Action Weeks’, an initiative to concentrate reuse events around a particular week. They would like to see this expanded across the network as a catalysing focus.  

Political Direction – This was the most divisive theme, with some questioning the need for agreeing shared, political demands, while others argued that this can give focus to the network, informed by local contexts. The topic of HouseEurope! loomed large, owing to many delegates being involved with the initiative. By the end of the assembly, conversations had come full circle, returning again to topics of profit, speculation and opaque ownership being transversal and ripe for further interrogation.

Movement Building – Fundamental to this gathering, and a daunting topic to confront, this group engaged in a lively and practical conversation. Funding was a recurring need from nearly all organisations and there was a broad willingness to collaborate on funding bids. In-person gatherings like this are so often the seed for further projects. Key to this was a proposal to share successful bids, project ideas and successes on some shared platform. Deciding a digital platform to facilitate this movement sparked lots of debate.

Somewhat informed by the profile of participating groups, an overarching theme throughout the assembly recognised that the climate crisis, the housing crisis and the labour crisis are fundamentally enmeshed. Ideas as simple as: an architect working 5-days a week with unpaid overtime, doesn’t have time to embed climate action into their practice. Or: How do we balance the demand for more housing with the need to decarbonise? Interrogating this intersectionality is perhaps where a network such as this can find its purpose.

These themes are now being carried forward by working groups, with delegates gravitating to the one(s) they are most energised by.

Key Tensions & Open Questions

The assembly surfaced important tensions that the movement continues to navigate:

Diversity vs. Collective Demand Are we building toward a single unified European movement with shared demands? Or is our strength in diversity,multiple local initiatives cross-pollinating and learning from each other while maintaining autonomy? This tension is likely productive, not something to “solve”: We probably need both,shared frames and values (housing as a right, climate justice, solidarity) AND local autonomy and experimentation.

Professional Practice vs. Activism Many participants are architects, designers, and planners, professionals with economic stakes in the current system. How do we navigate conflicts between professional interests and activist commitments? How do we unionise while also staying employed? How do we use professional expertise without reproducing hierarchies?

Language in the pursuit of public interest Opinions differed around how to communicate beyond our engaged, activist bubble. How does a network of built environment professionals communicate to the general public? How can we demand radical, systemic shifts, without being dismissed as fringe concepts? 

European Scope vs. Global South Solidarity The network is European, but our decisions affect people globally (material extraction, labour conditions, climate impacts). How do we ensure voices of those directly harmed by our consumption are centered? How do we move beyond “awareness” to actual resource-sharing and solidarity?

Strategy & Spontaneity Some situations call for coordinated strategy and planning; others require rapid response and flexibility. How do we balance these without creating bureaucracy or top-down control?

Conclusion: From Assembly to Movement

The European Assembly for a Just Building Transition was not a traditional conference with outputs and recommendations. Rather, it is a gathering of movements,autonomous initiatives choosing, in this moment, to coordinate, learn, and build power together.

The assembly revealed both shared interests (housing is a right not a commodity; extraction must end; workers and communities must have power in decisions) and diverse strategies. Some organisations focus on direct action and expropriation; others on professional advocacy; others on education and culture-change. Some work locally; others across Europe; others in global solidarity.

What connects them is commitment to:

  • Decentring profit in the building sector
  • Retrofitting before demolition
  • Strengthening transparency in ownership and decision-making
  • Including voices of those directly affected by building decisions
  • Building solidarity across movements (climate, labour, housing, global justice)
  • Experimenting with alternatives to extraction and hierarchy

The real work begins now: translating assembly energy into sustained coordination, concrete campaigns, funding, and capacity-building. This requires:

  • Clear communication & regular check-ins
  • Decentralized decision-making with some shared commitments
  • Attention to care, burnout prevention, and accessibility

ACAN Norway:

Participating in the 2nd European Assembly for a Just Building Transition was both inspiring and grounding. Coming from a Nordic context — geographically peripheral but culturally and politically tied to Europe — we were reminded of how essential transnational collaboration is for accelerating change. As Norway sits just outside the EU framework, many of the green policies shaping Europe’s building transition do not directly apply to us. This makes our participation in the network even more vital: by joining forces with European initiatives, we can adapt and advocate for similar policy ambitions domestically, ensuring Norway does not fall behind in the systemic transformation of the built environment.

The assembly confirmed that no single national or professional group can tackle the scale of the crisis alone. The intersection of climate, housing, and labour concerns is deeply relevant in Norway, where high living costs, resource extraction, and construction emissions expose the contradictions between prosperity and sustainability. Engaging with activists across Europe offers us not only solidarity but also practical pathways — from reuse initiatives to unionising strategies.

Our Commitments as ACAN Norway

  • Strengthen European connections: We will stay actively engaged in the network’s working groups and coordination meetings, contributing to cross-border campaigns.
  • Localise European priorities: We aim to translate the outcomes of the assembly into Norwegian advocacy — pushing for policy shifts that align our national building practices with EU-level goals on decarbonisation and circularity.
  • Promote retrofit and reuse: We commit to amplifying campaigns around adaptive reuse, circular construction, and material transparency in the Norwegian context.
  • Support solidarity over isolation: We recognise that Norway’s wealth and resource base come with responsibility. Our activism must connect with both European and Global South struggles related to extraction, labour, and climate inequities.
  • Prioritise care and accessibility: Within our own movement, we will strive to prevent burnout, sustain participation, and maintain horizontal decision-making in line with the assembly’s ethos.

Looking Forward
The Frankfurt assembly has strengthened our conviction that ACAN Norway must be part of a broader European movement — not only to share our local experiences but to ensure that remote or non-EU contexts like ours are not overlooked in the collective transition. 

We return home inspired, with renewed motivation to nurture long-term alliances and to help build a truly just, regenerative, and decarbonised built environment for all.

Words: Eva Kuiper & Tom Parker

Dispatch from the European Assembly for a Just Building Transition.
Dispatch from the European Assembly for a Just Building Transition.
Dispatch from the European Assembly for a Just Building Transition.