Guisan, Adrien O. T.Adrien O. T.Guisan0009-0002-1546-65942026-02-062026-02-062025-12-06https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/230297This presentation explores how housing cooperatives, framed as a form of urban commons, can be significantly scaled without compromising its key principles of de-commodification, democratic & autonomous governance, and inclusion. Through comparative case studies of the cities of Zurich, Geneva, and Lausanne, we explore the potential, limits, and trade-offs entailed with Public‑Commons Partnerships (PCPs) as a strategy to redistribute power and resources to the public. Drawing on policy documents, secondary sources, statistical data, and 20+ stakeholder interviews, the study analyzes how policy frameworks and historical contexts shape divergent scaling trajectories. Zurich’s early institutionalization of housing cooperatives enabled the large-scale development and autonomization of the sector. In contrast, Geneva’s restrictive framework hindered development throughout the 20th century, and Lausanne’s conditional support resulted in the selective scaling of large, often “social” cooperatives. In the 21st century, as all three cities struggle with rising housing costs and land scarcity, their approach to cooperative housing development appears to be converging, facilitated by a federal policy framework that promotes cooperative housing. The findings highlight PCPs’ potential to scale housing commons, but underscore trade offs between autonomy, inclusivity, and long term de commodification. In particular, while a certain degree of autonomy is necessary for commons to thrive, they also risk turning into inwards-facing enclaves – which can be mitigated by appropriate arrangements and legislation.conference_item