Guisan, Adrien O. T.Adrien O. T.Guisan0009-0002-1546-6594Liu, TianzhuTianzhuLiu0000-0001-8396-4398Gerber, Jean-DavidJean-DavidGerber0000-0001-9111-90712025-05-052025-05-052025-04-16https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/209839The concept of commons has gained traction in housing research. However, when translated to the housing field, the notion of commons is interpreted in various ways and applied to a large range of situations. This increasing interest in the commons has thus resulted in a high degree of conceptual pluralism in the field. While this pluralism is inevitable, and, to a certain extent, necessary to grasp a complex social reality, it can also lead to confusion. This article addresses this issue by conducting a systematic scoping review of the literature from 1990 to 2023 to capture how the concept of commons is used in housing research. Using thematic coding and k-mode clustering, we identify five distinct clusters: (i) “commons in housing”, with a focus on collective action problems, (ii) “housing as commons”, with a focus on the use-value of collective housing arrangements and their de-commodification, (iii) “commoning in housing”, with a focus on socially reproductive collective practices, (iv) “commons/commoning for housing”, with a focus on co-production in housing and urban governance, and (v) “commons/commoning as a political practice”, with a focus on everyday politics and housing activism. Our cluster-based approach thus provides a valuable framework to navigate the pluralism of the field and can be replicated in other subject areas.enHousingcommonsclusteringreviewcondominiumcooperativesquatco-production300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropologyarticle10.48620/8736610.5334/ijc.1490