Ireland is facing a homelessness crisis on a scale that continues to challenge the country’s housing system, while Finland once widely regarded as one of Europe’s strongest examples of reducing homelessness has recently seen its numbers rise again.
The contrast raises an important question for Ireland: what can be learned from Finland’s Housing First approach, and why has progress there begun to weaken?
Ireland’s official homelessness figures recorded 17,482 people in emergency accommodation in June 2026, including 11,862 adults and 5,620 children. The figures are compiled through the Pathway Accommodation and Support System and count people accommodated in emergency accommodation funded and overseen by housing authorities during the relevant monthly count week.
That figure is significant, but it should not be interpreted as a complete count of everyone experiencing homelessness. People who are sleeping rough, staying temporarily with friends or relatives, or experiencing other forms of hidden homelessness may not appear in the emergency-accommodation statistics.
Finland’s Housing First approach
Finland’s experience became internationally recognised because it approached long-term homelessness differently from traditional systems.
Under Housing First, permanent accommodation is provided before a person is expected to resolve other difficulties. Support for issues such as mental health, addiction and social integration is then provided alongside the tenancy.
The principle is particularly aimed at people experiencing long-term homelessness or repeated use of emergency accommodation who have complex support needs.
Rather than requiring people to progress through a series of temporary accommodation stages before becoming eligible for a permanent home, the model treats secure housing as the foundation from which other problems can be addressed.
Finland experienced a prolonged decline in homelessness after adopting the approach.
But that progress has not continued indefinitely.
Finland’s homelessness figures have started rising
Official Finnish figures show that 4,579 people living alone were homeless in 2025, an increase of 773, or 20%, from the previous year.
The increase followed more than a decade of decline.
Long-term homelessness also rose, reaching 1,306 people, while homelessness among under-25s increased by 37% and homelessness among women rose by 24%.
Finnish authorities identified several factors associated with the increase, including changes to social security, higher living costs, rising housing costs, unemployment, rent-payment difficulties and financial problems. Mental health and substance-use problems were also identified among the factors affecting homelessness.
The figures provide an important warning for countries looking at Finland as a model.
A successful homelessness strategy cannot operate separately from the wider housing and social-support system.
Housing First is not a complete homelessness strategy
The Finnish experience does not mean that Housing First has failed.
It demonstrates something more complicated.
Housing First can be highly effective for people experiencing chronic homelessness, particularly when permanent accommodation is combined with appropriate health and social supports.
But homelessness can continue to grow if new households are losing access to housing faster than the system can prevent or resolve homelessness.
That distinction is particularly important in Ireland.
A significant part of Ireland’s homelessness problem involves families and children in emergency accommodation. Housing First is primarily designed for people experiencing long-term homelessness and complex needs, rather than being a universal solution for every household threatened with homelessness.
Ireland already has Housing First
Ireland has already adopted the central principle.
The Government’s Housing First National Implementation Plan 2022–2026 was designed to provide 1,319 additional supported tenancies for people with a history of rough sleeping or long-term use of emergency accommodation and complex needs.
The programme combines permanent accommodation with intensive supports intended to help people maintain their tenancies.
By the end of the third quarter of 2025, more than 1,000 people were already living in Housing First homes under the programme, according to the Department of Housing.
This means Ireland does not need to decide whether to introduce Housing First.
It needs to determine how effectively the approach can be expanded while tackling the much wider causes of homelessness.
The bigger difference is housing supply
One of the most important lessons from Finland is that Housing First requires actual homes.
Providing someone with permanent accommodation is impossible if there are not enough suitable and affordable properties available.
That makes the supply of social and affordable housing central to any serious attempt to reduce homelessness.
Ireland’s emergency accommodation system can provide somewhere for people to stay when they lose their homes, but emergency accommodation does not create a permanent housing supply.
The same problem arises when households are repeatedly moved between temporary accommodation options because there is nowhere affordable for them to go.
Housing First changes the starting point for people with complex needs, but it cannot remove a shortage of homes.
Prevention matters as much as exits
Another lesson from Finland is that reducing homelessness requires more than moving people out of homelessness.
A housing system can successfully help hundreds or thousands of people into permanent accommodation and still see homelessness rise if new households continue to lose their homes.
Prevention therefore needs to operate alongside Housing First.
That can include intervention before an eviction, support for households struggling with rent or mortgage payments, access to affordable housing and measures designed to prevent people from falling into long-term homelessness.
For Ireland, this distinction is particularly important.
If the flow of new households into homelessness remains high, increasing the number of people successfully rehoused may not be enough to reduce the overall emergency-accommodation population.
Ireland faces a different scale and pattern of homelessness
The Irish figures also need to be understood in their own context.
The official monthly total is based on people receiving emergency accommodation through the State-funded system.
It does not capture every person without a secure home.
Someone sleeping on a friend’s sofa, staying temporarily with relatives or living in severely overcrowded circumstances may not appear in the monthly emergency-accommodation count.
This means the official figure is best understood as a measure of homelessness within the emergency-accommodation system rather than a complete measurement of housing insecurity across Ireland.
That distinction matters when comparing Ireland with other countries, because homelessness definitions and counting methods can differ substantially.
Why simply copying Finland would not work
Ireland could learn from Finland’s principles without simply attempting to reproduce its entire system.
The most transferable lesson is the idea that people experiencing chronic homelessness should not have to prove that they are ready for a home before receiving one.
Permanent accommodation can provide the stability needed to address other problems.
But Ireland also needs sufficient social and affordable housing to support that approach.
The country faces competition for homes from households already struggling in the private rental market, people leaving emergency accommodation, people on social-housing waiting lists and households trying to enter homeownership.
That means the Housing First programme is operating within a housing market where demand for affordable accommodation is already extremely high.
Delivery is another challenge
Increasing housing supply is easier to describe than to deliver.
New social and affordable housing depends on suitable land, planning decisions, infrastructure, construction capacity and funding.
Delays at any stage can slow the number of homes becoming available.
There is also a difference between announcing a housing target and having completed homes ready for occupation.
For people already experiencing homelessness, the timing matters.
A home that is planned for several years from now cannot solve the immediate shortage of permanent accommodation for someone living in emergency housing today.
This is why homelessness policy needs both immediate interventions and long-term housing delivery.
Finland’s recent setback is an important warning
Finland’s experience may actually be more useful to Ireland now that its homelessness figures are rising again.
The country demonstrates that a housing-led model can produce substantial reductions in long-term homelessness.
But its recent increase also shows that earlier progress can be reversed.
The Finnish authorities have linked the recent rise to several pressures, including housing costs, living expenses, social-security changes, unemployment and financial difficulties.
The lesson is that homelessness cannot be treated as an isolated problem affecting only people who are already without a home.
Changes in rents, incomes, welfare supports and the availability of affordable accommodation can all affect the number of people at risk.
Can Ireland end homelessness?
Ireland has already adopted one of the most important principles associated with Finland’s success.
The harder question is whether it can build the wider system needed to make that principle work at scale.
Housing First can provide a permanent route out of chronic homelessness for people with complex needs.
But it cannot, on its own, prevent families from losing their homes, create enough social housing, reduce private rents or ensure that households have sufficient income to remain securely housed.
Ireland therefore needs a combination of permanent housing, Housing First, homelessness prevention and adequate social supports.
Finland’s experience shows that a sustained housing-led strategy can make a major difference.
Its recent reversal shows something equally important: progress can be lost when housing costs rise and the wider support system comes under pressure.
For Ireland, the lesson is not simply to copy Finland.
It is to build a housing system in which people who become homeless can move into permanent accommodation, while fewer people are pushed into homelessness in the first place.
