Does the real estate market increasingly force more families to build?

The correlation is very high, but deriving causality, regardless of the direction, inevitably leads back to the regulars' table.
It is beautifully said in the Bible:
"For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him."

The correlation is very high, but deriving causality, regardless of direction, inevitably leads back to the regulars' table.

I have summarized an essential content of the study and considered it in an undercomplex way. That is true. Let me put it differently: We are a rich country where people live with a comparatively low average private wealth. France, Italy, Spain, Portugal are less wealthy countries, but the average private wealth there is significantly higher. The causal relationship with the proportion of homeowners is widely agreed upon. Our net wage level, on the other hand, is higher again than in the mentioned countries. Something obviously works differently for us regarding the relationship between living expenses and consumption to wealth accumulation.

The causal connection with the proportion of homeowners is widely consensual.

No. One can easily imagine a wealthy tenant society and one in which every mud hut belongs to its resident. The "wealth" of a country is the total national wealth, not just the private wealth.

Our net wage level, on the other hand, is again higher than in the mentioned countries.

What is important is the level of labor unit costs. Wages must be related to productivity. Because this determines prices. In Germany, this is the lowest, reflected by the highest export surpluses in Europe (and now in the world). Conclusion: The German earns on average far too little. That makes the wealth accumulation less surprising.

is widely consensual.

What is widely consensual in economics is nowadays mostly wrong. The mainstream economics practiced worldwide is unscientific and simply nonsense. "Consensus" on economic issues is therefore not a good measure.

The "wealth" of a country is the total national wealth, not just the private wealth.

The combination of a rich country and low average private wealth is striking. The wage cost per unit of output, price, and wage level comparison you cited cannot explain this in the European context.

We have too low an ownership rate here; this is a tenant country, not an owner country. Elsewhere, ownership is promoted much, much more strongly, with success. - Ownership is wealth. K.

Labor unit costs in Germany have lagged behind those of the comparison countries in their development for twenty years.

So that is certainly a factor.

But it is also important: What could be passed on as inheritances after the rebuilding after WW2? More substance was destroyed here than in the comparison countries you listed, so one had to start again at a lower level of wealth, which must still be visible a few generations later.

Thirdly, I see the attitude of Germans towards debt. It is different outside Germany. We have a high savings rate in the private sector. But wealth is built up through investments (also in one's own house) and investments are made with: debt. However, the German private sector is less indebted than other private sectors elsewhere. For decades.

The Swabian housewife also only lives in her own home on credit...