Citation: Häkkänen, L.; Ilgın, H.E.;
Karjalainen, M. Cottage Culture in
Finland: Development and
Perspectives. Encyclopedia 2022, 2,
705–716. https://doi.org/10.3390/
encyclopedia2020049
Academic Editors: Masa Noguchi,
Antonio Frattari, Carlos Torres
Formoso, Has¸im Altan, John
Odhiambo Onyango, Jun-Tae Kim,
Kheira Anissa Tabet Aoul, Mehdi
Amirkhani, Sara Jane Wilkinson,
Shaila Bantanur and Raffaele
Barretta
Received: 11 March 2022
Accepted: 11 April 2022
Published: 13 April 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Entry
Cottage Culture in Finland: Development and Perspectives
Lotta Häkkänen, Hüseyin Emre Ilgın * and Markku Karjalainen
School of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Tampere University, P.O. Box 600,
FI-33014 Tampere, Finland; lotta.k.h@gmail.com (L.H.); markku.karjalainen@tuni.fi (M.K.)
* Correspondence: emre.ilgin@tuni.fi
Definition: This entry provides an understanding of the past, present, and future of the Finnish
cottage culture to create an overall picture of its development trajectory and its terminology, e.g., villa,
in this context denoting a second home. Convenient, ready-made solutions, easy maintenance, a
high level of equipment, year-round use, location, and modern and simple architectural styles are
important selection criteria for (summer) cottages that belonged only to the wealthy bourgeois class
in the 19th century and have taken their present form with a major transformation in Finland since
then. Additionally, municipal regulations and increased attention to ecological concerns are other
important issues regarding the cottage today. Cottage inheritance has changed over the generations,
and the tightening of building regulations and increased environmental awareness are key drivers of
the future transformation of cottage culture. Moreover, the increasing demand for single-family and
outdoor spaces created by social changes such as remote working, which has become widespread
with the COVID-19 pandemic, will make the summer cottage lifestyle even more popular in Finland.
It is thought that this entry will contribute to the continuance of the Finnish cottage culture, which is
essential for the vitality of countryside municipalities, local development, national culture, and the
well-being of Finnish people.
Keywords: (summer) cottage; second home; (summer) villa; holiday home; Finland
1. Introduction
Second homes, rooted in ancient civilizations, differ conceptually from region to region
and culture to culture [1]. In many countries, people have a second home to access the
geographical and cultural benefits that their primary property cannot give them. Among
the major factors that make owning a second home attractive, is the desire to be in a
natural environment, the search for an authentic atmosphere, or the inclination towards
a countryside lifestyle [2]. In this sense, second homes are preferred not only by the
privileged group but also by many people as weekend getaways in Nordic countries [3].
Partly as a consequence of the prosperity and abundance of the region, Scandinavian people
generally buy a second home in the rural areas. Likewise, in countries like Turkey, second
homes in mountain regions are used by many people as part of their culture to avoid the
hot season in the summertime. For this reason, the importance of global borders are being
lessened and second homes are gradually gaining an international dimension [4].
The Nordic lifestyle is closely linked to nature and the highly anticipated but short-
lived summer season [5]. The most popular and ideal way to spend the summer months in
Finland is in a lakeside cottage surrounded by nature [6] (see Figure 1). This tradition is
grounded in traditional culture and lifestyle and forms an important part of the Finnish
national landscape [7]. Many Finns consider the cottage to balance out city life [8].
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, 705–716. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia2020049 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/encyclopedia
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 706Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 2 
 
 
 
Figure 1. The typical view from a lakeside cottage plot in Finland (Photo courtesy of Hüseyin Emre 
Ilgın). 
‘Cottage’ is the best explanatory translation of the Finnish term ‘mökki’, a word with 
a robust cultural value for Finnish people, which is widely used in everyday life and for-
mal contexts. The term has many meanings, from a humble cottage to a luxury villa like a 
‘second home’. A ‘cottage’ (see Figure 2) is constructed on a permanent basis and is de-
fined as a residence used for recreational or leisure purposes [9]. The term ‘summer cot-
tage’ is widespread and understood in Finnish, but it literally refers to dwellings used 
only in the summertime and is often linked to simple inhabitation. Additionally, terms 
that are functionally related to their meanings, e.g., holiday home, are mainly used for 
more official purposes and refer to leisure and vacation uses. Furthermore, second resi-
dence or second home is a common and modern notion that does not limit the use of the 
house as a term only for the holidays or a certain period of the year. In this entry, the term 
second home or place of residence is used to refer to a particularly well-outfitted year-
round-use cottage. 
  
(a) (b) 
Figure 1. The typical view from a lakeside cottage plot in Finland (Photo courtesy of Hüseyin Emre Ilgın).
‘Cottage’ is the best explanatory translation of the Finnish term ‘mökki’, a word with a
robust cultural value for Finnish people, which is widely used in everyday life and formal
contexts. The term has many meanings, from a humble cottage to a luxury villa like a
‘second home’. A ‘cottage’ (see Figure 2) is constructed on a permanent basis and is defined
as a residence used for recreational or leisure purposes [9]. The term ‘summer cottage’
is widespread and understood in Finnish, but it literally refers to dwellings used only in
the summertime and is often linked to simple inhabitation. Additionally, terms that are
functionally related to their meanings, e.g., holiday home, are mainly used for more official
purposes and refer to leisure and vacation uses. Furthermore, second residence or second
home is a common and modern notion that does not limit the use of the house as a term
only for the holi ays or a certain period of the year. In this entry, the term second home or
place of residence is used to refer to a particularly well-outfitt d year-round-use cottag .
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 2 
 
 
 
Figure 1. The typical view from a lakeside cottage plot in Finland (Photo courtesy of Hüseyin Emre 
Ilgın). 
‘Cottag ’ is the b st explan tory translation of the Fi nish term ‘mökki’, a word with 
a robust cultural value for Finnish people, which is widely used in everyday life and for-
mal contexts. The term has many meani gs, from a humble cottage to a luxury villa like a 
‘second home’. A ‘cottage’ (see Figure 2) is onstruct d on a permanent basis and is de-
fined as a resid nce used for recreational or leisure purposes [9]. The term ‘summer cot-
tage’ is wid spread and understood in Fin ish, but it literally refers to dwellings us  
only in the summertime and is often linked to simple inhabitation. Additionally, terms 
that are functio ally related to the r meanings, e.g., holiday home, are mainly used for 
more official purposes and refer to leisure and vacation uses. Furthermore, second resi-
dence or second home is a common and modern notion that does not limit the use of the 
house as a term only for the holidays or a certain period of the year. In th s try, th  term 
second home or place of residence s used to refer o a partic larly w ll- tfitted y ar-
round-use cottage. 
  
(a) (b) 
Figure 2. Cont.
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 707
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 3 
 
 
 
 
(c) (d) 
Figure 2. A cottage from the town of Ikaalinen, Finland: (a) entrance; (b) open kitchenette; (c) fire-
place; (d) exterior view (Photos courtesy of Jenni Vilkman). 
In the Finnish context, second homes play a vital role in the expression of the coun-
try’s cultural landscape [10], illustrating the significance of outdoor leisure and conven-
tional activities [11]. A large segment of the Finnish people defines second homes as very 
valuable [12]. Additionally, the second home in rural municipalities is critical to the re-
gional economy and has considerable job potential in Finland [13]. Second homes and 
tourism potential have also been the focus of academic research for a long time and have 
become an established part of leisure time in various countries [14–20]. Both in Finland 
and internationally, second homes have become not only an essential part of people’s lei-
sure pursuits but also entire lifestyles [21]. 
The summer villa trend that started in the 19th century represented a model of luxury 
living that belonged only to the elite in the early years of Finland’s independence [7]. 
Originally built near cities, the earliest ancestors of these cottages later spread to the coast-
lines and countryside. As industrialization increased in cities, holiday homes offered an 
escape to the natural environment. In the 1950s, spending time in the cottage became the 
pastime of almost all Finns, and in the 1980s cottage construction increased and reached 
its peak. The number of cottages in Finland at the end of 2018 exceeded half a million 
[9,12]. 
The size, comfort level, and prevalence of use in the winter months of the cottages, 
whose ownership is gradually transferred to new generations, is increasing [22]. In addi-
tion, global factors, e.g., the sharing economy, flexible working practices, and increased 
environmental awareness due to climate crises, also significantly affect the Finnish cottage 
culture [19]. Restrictions on coastline building and new wastewater guidelines are on the 
agenda among Finnish cottage owners [23]. On the other hand, although the interest in 
Finnish cottages still seems high, inherited traditional cottages located in Finnish forests 
are at risk of deterioration and are struggling to respond to changing trends and needs. 
Wood, which has never lost its popularity among construction materials, has always 
been the most common construction material in cottage architecture [24]. Cottage build-
ings and newly built holiday homes are almost entirely wooden, 70% of which are log 
buildings (see Figure 3) [25]. Wood is considered a natural, warm, and ecological material 
that is compatible with the Finnish landscape [26–43]. Features such as breathability, 
Figure 2. A cottage from the town of Ikaalinen, Finland: (a) entrance; (b) open kitchenette;
(c) fireplace; (d) exterior view (Photos courtesy of Jenni Vilkman).
In the Finnish context, second homes play a vital role in the expression of the country’s
cultural landscape [10], illustrating the significance of outdoor leisure and conventional
activities [11]. A large segment of the Fin ish people defines second homes as very valu-
a le [12]. iti all , t e sec e in rural municipalities is critical to the regional
econ my and has considerable job potential in Fi land [13]. Second homes and tourism
potential have also been th focus f academic research fo a long time and have become an
established part of leisure time in various countries [14–20]. Both in Finland and i terna-
tionally, second homes ave become not only an essential part of people’s leisure pursuits
but also entire lifestyles [21].
The summer villa trend that started in the 19th century represented a m del of luxury
living that belonged only to the elite in the early years of Finland’s independence [7].
Originally built near cities, the e rli t ancestors of these cottages later spread o the
coastlines and countrysi e. As industrialization increas d in cities, liday homes offered
an escape to the natural environment. In the 1950s, spending time in the cottage became the
pastime of almost all Finns, and in the 1980s cottage constructio increased and reached its
peak. The number of c tt es i i l at the end of 2018 exceeded half a million [9,12].
The size, comfort level, and prevalence of use in the winter months of the cottages,
whose ownership is gradually transferred to new generations, is increasing [22]. In addi-
tion, global factors, e.g., the sharing economy, flexible working practices, and increased
environmental awareness due to climate crises, also significantly affect the Finnish cottage
culture [19]. Restrictions on coastline building and new wastewater guidelines are on the
agenda among Finnish cottage owners [23]. On the other hand, although the interest in
Finnish cottages still seems high, inherited traditional cottages located in Finnish forests
are at risk of deterioration and are struggling to respond to changing trends and needs.
Wood, which has never lost its popularity among construction materials, has always
been the most common construction material in cottage architecture [24]. Cottage buildings
and newly built holiday homes are almost entirely wooden, 70% of which are log buildings
(see Figure 3) [25]. Wood is considered a natural, warm, and ecological material that is com-
patible with the Finnish landscape [26–43]. Features such as breathability, moisture balance,
allergy friendliness, and esthetics are other prominent benefits of log construction [44].
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 708
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 4 
 
 
moisture balance, allergy friendliness, and esthetics are other prominent benefits of log 
construction [44]. 
 
Figure 3. Log cottage example from northern Finland (Photo courtesy of Lotta Häkkänen). 
Governance, development, mobility, and tourism are among the most discussed top-
ics in the existing literature, terminologically based on the second home. To date, there are 
limited studies in the literature focusing on the Finnish cottage culture, which is of great 
social and economic significance for Finland [45]. 
The social aspect of the cottage phenomenon is accepted as one of the most critical 
dimensions and is associated with the themes of maintaining social facilities and infra-
structure, increasing community welfare and social capital, and placing the commitments 
of second homeowners in the Finnish context [13]. Additionally, second home users are 
an important summer population group in various parts of Finland, creating demand for 
regional facilities and can be involved in community life and local politics. Considering 
the economic significance of the cottage culture in Finland, especially for countryside mu-
nicipalities, multiple residences have a substantial effect on the regional economy and the 
second home provides significant business potential. In this context, second homes often 
make a large contribution to local economies, and this is especially significant as the pop-
ulation declines in countryside areas [13]. Other significant encouraging economic effects 
of second homes can be listed as follows: tax revenues to the local municipal economy, 
alleviating or rising estate prices, generating new jobs, creating new investments, and at-
tracting new tourists. Thus, the cottage industry, which can be considered a historic initi-
ative merging economic and cultural-political efforts in an institutional framework, is 
mainly defined as an economic activity that encourages an entrepreneurial and self-suffi-
cient lifestyle in the countryside [46]. 
This entry focuses on the past, present, and future of the Finnish cottage, which to-
gether form an overall picture of the cottage’s development trajectory. In doing so, it iden-
tifies the aspects of change that affect the architecture and usage patterns of Finnish cot-
tages and assesses the possible prospects and their impact on cottage construction and 
cottage architecture at a generic level. The entry also clarifies the terminology used, e.g., 
second home, summer villa, in this regard. It is believed that this entry will contribute to 
the continuation of the cottage culture, which is critical for the vitality of rural municipal-
ities, local development, national culture in Finland, and the well-being of Finnish people. 
Figure 3. Log cottage example from northern Finland (Photo courtesy of Lotta Häkkänen).
Governance, development, mobility, and tourism are among the most discussed topics
in the existing literature, terminologically based on the second home. To date, there are
limited studies in the literature focusing on the Finnish cottage culture, which is of great
social and economic significance for Finland [45].
The social aspect of the cottage phenomenon is accepted as one of the most critical
dimensions and is associated with the themes of maintaining social facilities and infras-
tructure, increasing com unity welfare and social capital, and placing the commitments
of second homeowners in the Fin ish context [13]. Additionally, second home users are
an important summer population group in various parts of Finland, creating demand for
regional facilities and can be involved in community life and local polit cs. Considering
the econo ic fi f the cottage culture in Finland, especially for countryside
municipalities, multipl residences have a substantial ffect on th regional ec nomy and
th second home provides s gnificant business potential. In this context, second homes
often make a large contribution to local economies, and this is especially significant as
the populatio declines in countryside areas [13]. Other significant encouragi g economic
effects f sec nd homes can be listed as follows: tax revenues to the ocal municipal econ-
omy, alleviating or rising estate prices, generati g new jobs, creati g new investments, and
attracting new tourists. T s, t tt i t , hich can be considered a historic initia-
tive merging economic and cultural-political efforts in an institutional framework, is mainly
defined as a economic activity that encourages an entrepreneurial and self-sufficient
lifestyle in the countryside [46].
This entry focuses on the past, present, and future of the Finnish cottage, which
together form an overall picture of the cottage’s develop ent trajectory. In doing so, it iden-
tifies the aspects of change that affect the architecture and usage patterns of Finnish cottages
and assesses the possible prospects and their impact on cottage construction and cottage
architecture at a generic level. The entry also clarifies the terminology used, e.g., second
home, summer villa, in this regard. It is believed that this entry will contribute to the
continuation of the cottage culture, which is critical for the vitality of rural municipalities,
local development, national culture in Finland, and the well-being of Finnish people.
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 709
2. Literature Survey on the ‘Second Home’ Concept
As mentioned above, the second home is a common and modern notion that does
not limit the use of the term to houses only occupied during holidays or a certain period
of the year. ‘Secondary dwelling’ is progressively used as a corresponding phrase for
the cottage. Second homes and secondary houses are referred to in leisure housing and
media studies, but with frequently differing definitions [13,47]. The second home can be
considered as a supplementary dwelling next to the primary house. On average, regarding
the annual use of second homes, Scandinavian countries generally show an active pattern:
they were reported to be used 75 days a year in Finland, 71 days in Sweden, and 47 days in
Norway [48]. Second homes in Finland play a significant role in representing the national
landscape [10], reflecting the significance of outdoor leisure and traditional activities [11].
Second homes and tourism are an established element of leisure in various countries and
are the subject of scholarly studies (e.g., [15–17]).
There are a limited number of studies on the Finnish cottage culture, but there are numer-
ous studies on the concept of a second home. Notable studies include Häkkänen et al. [49],
who researched Finnish cottage culture from an experts’ point of view through interviews,
in which the main findings were based on key themes, including cottage buyers, character-
istics of dream cottages, diversified cottages, the regulation of cottages in municipalities,
and challenges in the regulation of cottages. Overvåg [50] explored the link between second
homes and urban growth in the Oslo area, Norway. The study showed that second homes
and urban growth are connected to some extent, but regulations by the government pre-
clude a stronger link. In addition, Overvåg’s work highlighted the impact of land scarcity
and demand changes, noting that urban growth is one of the factors affecting the location
of second homes owned by Oslo residents. Müller et al. [51] conducted a survey among
Swedish holiday homeowners examining the relationships between vacationers and the
Swedish countryside. The survey results showed that today’s leisure accommodation busi-
ness, do not considering settling in vacation home permanently. However, there were signs
that residential use would increase, indicating that the boundaries between second homes
and permanent residences might disappear after a while. Hiltunen and Rehunen [52] scru-
tinized the leisure-based mobile lifestyle between the urban home and rural second home
in the Finnish context, mainly via GIS data and questionnaires. The results showed that
social changes such as urbanization, modernization, rural restructuring, distribution, and
mobility, as well as historical events and government decisions at different levels play an
active role in second home tourism. Rinne et al. [53] examined second home management
from the standpoint of public participation, using three group discussions focusing on three
cottage-rich places in Finland. The results demonstrated that the traditional approaches of
cottage owners are increasingly supported and reconfigured by heterogeneous and diverse
second home users. The Finnish Environment Institute [13] analyzed how citizens and
municipalities perceive the situation and development of second home tourism. While
revealing that second homes play an important role in both leisure mobility and rural areas,
the report underlined the views of Finnish municipalities that second homes contribute
positively to regional economies.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, urbanization trends have changed, and the impor-
tance of housing conditions has increased drastically [54,55]. In the post-epidemic world,
people began to prefer low-density rural areas over high-density urban centers [56]. In
this context, the pandemic is an important social phenomenon influencing the meaning
of ‘second homes’ and, in its initial stages, second homeowners thought of them as an
escape from urban areas where the virus was spreading more wildly [57]. Shortly after the
outbreak of the epidemic and the closure of workplaces, schools, and restaurants, people
began to flee to their second homes as a better spot for isolation. Consequently, second
home use has extended beyond the leisure industry and into ‘protection from epidemics’
to ‘favored remote workplace’ [58], as in the cases of Russia, Turkey, the United Kingdom,
and France [59–61]. Furthermore, people focused on domestic tourism as many national
borders were closed during the period of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic,
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 710
second homes have become a more significant form of domestic tourism in many countries
where a significant proportion of people have access to a second home, particularly in rural
areas, as in the cases of the Nordic countries, Southern Europe, Russia, North America,
and Australia [62]. In addition, outdoor areas, e.g., gardens and balconies, are encourag-
ing leisure activities such as gardening, which were beneficial for well-being during the
COVID-19 pandemic [45,52,63,64]. Thus, these crucial changes and new demands in daily
life contribute to the importance of studies on cottage culture.
There are many studies on the COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on second home
ownership and tourism. Among the major studies, Zog˘al et al. [57] examined the epistemic
progression of the concept of ‘second homes’ and revealed possible consequences that
could place second homes at the center of tourist activity. They concluded that in the initial
phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, second homes were moving from high-density urban
areas to low-density rural areas and a probable transformation in tourist preferences could
place second homes at the center of tourism activity as soon as travel limitations were
lifted, which could increase current housing commodification procedures by strengthening
residential platforms. Pitkanen et al. [62] analyzed the safety of second homes during the
COVID-19 pandemic in various locations, e.g., Sweden, Finland, Canada, and Russia, and
found that even though the second home cultures of different locales may differ, in general,
people were utilizing their second homes for escape and safety during the pandemic.
Bieger et al. [65] discussed the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and second
home prices in Switzerland, and the results indicated a considerable price increase in
second homes—especially compared to flat prices—after the onset of the pandemic.
As can be understood from the literature review above, the concept of a second house,
which has an important place in cottage terminology, is a research topic that has increased
in importance and popularity in Finland and many other countries, especially with the
pandemic. The next section will discuss the development, current status, and future of this
important topic in the Finnish context.
3. Cottage Culture in Finland: Past, Present, and Future
Despite strong traditions, Finnish cottage culture is a relatively new phenomenon. Its
development from past to present is summarized below [49,66]. The summer villa trend,
which started in Finland in the 19th century, in big cities such as Helsinki and Turku, was
only for the wealthy bourgeoisie. The number of villas, which was 1000 at the beginning
of the 20th century, exceeded 3000 in the next two decades. These villas, which were the
product of the urban culture of the past, were large and ornamental structures that only
urban families bought, mostly used in their spare time during the summer months.
Towards the end of the 1910s, that is, after Finland gained its independence (1917),
the effort towards modesty and practicality in the villas built in that period was striking.
In the 1920s, cities’ populations doubled and the search for summer residences expanded
even more. With the widespread use of buses and private vehicle transportation, distances
were no longer an obstacle to the purchase of villas, thanks to the rapidly developing
transportation. By the late 1930s, the number of villas in Finland quadrupled to more than
20,000 by 1940. Extravagant decoration declined, and villas began to imitate detached
houses in suburban areas, where gardening was an important part of life. Smaller weekend
cottages were also being built in greater numbers than before.
By the 1950s, spending time in the summer cottage became a nationwide activity that
could be experienced by the entire Finnish population. In those years, many people born in
rural areas migrated to cities to work mostly in industry, which accelerated the increase in
the number of summer cottages with urbanization. Simple summer cottages and weekend
cottages began to become more and more common, and cottage ownership spread rapidly
in rural municipalities. The size and equipment standard of the villas lost their importance
and emphasis on access to the open air and nature allowed for more modest cottages.
However, in the 1960s, the opposite trend developed, namely summer cottages that
were spacious, well-equipped, and could replace a second home for the family to use
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 711
throughout the year. In those years, the time spent at the summer cottage increased at the
weekends, as Saturday was a day off, and the number of villas exceeded 100,000, with one
out of every 13 households owning a summer cottage.
In the following years, the number of summer houses continued to increase, and
growth peaked in the 1980s, with more than 100,000 new cottages constructed over ten
years. Cottage construction has slowed since then, only increasing 23 percent in the
1990s, and at the end of 2020, the number of cottages reached nearly 510,000 as shown in
Figure 4 [67]. Additionally, cottage distribution on the basis of municipalities is indicated
in Figure 5 [68].
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 7 
 
 
However, in the 1960s, the opposite trend developed, namely summer cottages that 
were spacious, well-equipped, and could replace a second home for the family to use 
throughout the year. In those years, the ti e spent at the su er co tage increased at the 
weekends, as Saturday was a day o f, and the nu ber of vi las exceeded 100,000, ith one 
out of every 13 households owning a summer co tage. 
In the fo lowing years, the nu ber of su er houses continued to increase, and 
gro th peaked in the 1980s, with more than 100,000 new co tages constructed over ten 
years. Cot age construction has lowed since then, only increasing 23 percent in the 1990s, 
and at the end of 2020, the number of cottages reached nearly 510,000 as shown in Figure 
4 [67]. Additionally, cottage distribution on the basis of municipalities is indicate  n Fig-
ure 5 [68]. 
 
Figure 4. The number of cottages in Finland (1970–2020). 
 
Figure 5. Distribution of cottages by municipalities in Finland. 
Figure 4. The number of cottages in Finland (1970–2020).
Encyclopedia 2022, 2, FOR PEER REVIEW 7 
 
 
However, in the 1960s, the opposite trend developed, namely summer cottages that 
were spacious, well-equipped, and could replace a second home for the family to use 
throughout the year. In those years, the time spent at the su mer cottage increased at the 
weekends, as Saturday was a day off, and the number of villas exceeded 1 ,000, with one 
out of every 13 households owning a su mer cottage. 
In the following years, the number of su mer houses continued to increase, and 
growth peaked in the 1980s, with more than 100,000 new cottages constructed over ten 
years. Cottage construction has slowed since then, only increasing 23 percent in the 1990s, 
and at the end of 2020, the number of cottages reached nearly 510,000 as shown in Figure 
4 [67]. Additionally, cottage distribution on the basis of municipalities is indicated in Fig-
ure 5 [68]. 
 
Figure 4. The number of cottages in Finland (1970–2020). 
 
Figure 5. Distribution of cottages by municipalities in Finland. Figure 5. Distribution of cottages by municipalities in Finland.
Today, about fifty percent of the Finnish population regularly visit a cottage [3], and
summer cottage owners are only one part of this group. Grandchildren and children often
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 712
use their parents’ cottage, and about three million Finns travel to these homes at least
once a year [68]. Even though cottage preferences vary according to socioeconomic status
and income level [47], Finnish cottage culture remains widespread throughout the country.
Given the demands of key stakeholder groups, particularly contemporary consumers,
who play a crucial role in understanding the current state of Finnish cottage culture, the
following stand out, as stated in Häkkänen et al. [49]: (i) convenience, ready-made solutions,
easy maintenance, the high level of equipment, year-round use, location, and modern and
simple architectural style were among the main selection criteria in cottages, which were
generally preferred by a wealthy buyer profile over 50 years old; (ii) dryland cottages were
also evaluated as a possible alternative to waterfront cottages, due to their advantages
such as ease of access to services; (iii) environmental issues were among the topics that
buyers were interested in; (iv) when certain requirements were met, municipalities with
different approaches and procedures to the cottages showed positive attitudes towards
coastal development, regarding recreation areas where building rights and wastewater
treatment come to the fore; (v) there were some regulatory barriers to meeting user needs,
e.g., watered toilets in cottages that could be converted into permanent residences under
certain conditions.
Considering the above-mentioned current demands of cottage buyers, modern, com-
prehensively equipped holiday homes designed for year-round-use are likely to become
an increasingly important part of the future. Due to the limited selection of affordable
and suitable waterfront properties, the many inland countryside houses may become an
alternative for future cottages. It is thought that the younger generations especially will
be more prone to such second homes, which are different from the traditional lakeside
cottages. Additionally, rental cottages and other less binding forms of holiday homes will
likely continue to gain popularity. The cottage will likely be further modernized in the
future. However, there are also some ways that cottages which are too traditional could be
changed. Identifying these and combining them with the demands and requirements of
modern cottage owners is likely to increase the popularity of cottages.
On the other hand, it can be predicted that the increasing demand for detached houses
and outdoor use, which has developed as a reflection of the COVID-19 pandemic, will
further expand the summer cottage lifestyle. The serious price increase in second homes in
Finland after the epidemic also supports this expectation. Remote work, spending more
time in a second home, and therefore the increasing demand for houses with larger gardens
to be more intertwined with nature, will significantly affect the Finnish cottage market,
which will push the demand for year-round-use cottages to a much higher level than before
the pandemic.
Table 1 summarizes the cottage culture in Finland from past, present, and future perspectives.
Table 1. The evolution of Finnish cottage culture.
The Evolution of the Finnish Cottage Culture
Period Terminology (Mostly) Used Featured Notes
The 1800s Summer villa Villas, large and decorative buildings designed for the wealthy bourgeoisie,for leisure and summer use, began to grow around big cities.
1900–1920 Summer villa
The number of villas, which was 1000 in the early 1900s, increased to over
3000 in the next two decades. After the independence of
Finland, modesty and practicality came to the fore in villa designs.
The 1920s Summervilla/residence
Thanks to rapidly developing transportation conditions,
distances were no longer an obstacle to the purchase of villas.
1930s & 1940s
Summer
villa/residence & (weekend)
cottage
By the late 1930s, the number of villas in Finland quadrupled
to more than 20,000 by 1940. Extravagant decoration became even less
popular, and villas began to imitate suburban detached houses.
Demand for smaller weekend cottages increased.
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 713
Table 1. Cont.
The Evolution of the Finnish Cottage Culture
Period Terminology (Mostly) Used Featured Notes
The 1950s
Summer/
weekend
cottage
Spending time in summer cottages became a nationwide activity, and with
increased urbanization, the number of cottages increased rapidly.
The size and equipment level of the villas lost their importance.
The 1960s (Summer)cottage
The cottages, whose number exceeded 100,000, were starting to turn into
year-round-use second homes that were spacious and well equipped.
1970s & 1980s (Summer)cottage
The number of cottages continued to increase, and growth peaked in the
1980s, with more than 100,000 new ones built within a decade.
The 1990s (Summer)cottage Cottage construction slowed, increasing only 23% in the 1990s.
The 2000s (Summer)cottage At the end of 2020, the number of cottages exceeded half a million.
Today (Summer)cottage
Equipment level, year-round use, and location are the main selection
criteria for cottages, which are often bought by people over 50 with a
wealthy profile. Municipal regulations and environmental concerns are
other important issues.
Future (Summer)cottage
Demand for the well-equipped year-round-use cottage will increase.
Inland cottages will be an alternative to lakeside properties.
Less binding types of cottages will continue to gain popularity.
The epidemic will further expand the summer cottage lifestyle.
4. Conclusions
This entry concentrated on the past, present, and future of the Finnish cottage, which
together form an overall picture of the cottage’s development trajectory. In doing so, the
entry identified the aspects of change that affect the architecture and usage patterns of
Finnish cottages and assessed their possible prospects and impact on cottage construction
and cottage architecture at a generic level. It also clarified the terminology used, e.g., second
home, summer villa, in this regard. The main purpose of this entry was to contribute to
the continuation of the Finnish cottage culture, which has undergone social, cultural, and
architectural changes throughout its transformation from summer villas used only by the
elite in the 1800s to summer cottages used by all Finns today.
Although cottage life is becoming less and less like the traditional concept of spending
long summer weeks in a modest cottage, it still holds a special place in the hearts of the
Finnish people. Finns’ interest in cottages does not seem to be waning, but the ways of
implementing it are changing. The ease of solutions and maintenance of the cottage, as well
as the flexibility of use, are important for buyers. In addition, the number of contemporary,
well-equipped summer cottages suitable for year-round-use will continue to increase in
Finland. The contrast between permanent urban residences and holiday homes remains
the main reason Finns flee to cottages.
The generational change of cottage owners, tightening of building regulations, and
global megatrends, such as growing environmental awareness, are key drivers of the future
transformation of Finnish cottage culture. Additionally, as one of the consequences of
the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing demand for cottages for single-family and outdoor
use, created by changing priorities, such as remote working and spending more time in
a second home, will make the summer cottage lifestyle even more popular in Finland.
To preserve the cottage phenomenon, which is culturally and economically important to
Finland, sustainable solutions must be developed to meet the wishes and needs of modern
cottage owners and regulatory requirements.
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 714
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.H., H.E.I. and M.K.; methodology, L.H., H.E.I. and
M.K.; software, L.H. and H.E.I.; formal analysis, L.H., H.E.I. and M.K.; investigation, L.H., H.E.I.
and M.K.; data curation, L.H., H.E.I. and M.K.; writing—original draft preparation, H.E.I.; writing—
review and editing, L.H., H.E.I. and M.K.; visualization, L.H.; supervision, M.K. and H.E.I.; project
administration, M.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Coppock, J.T. (Ed.) Second Homes: Curse or Blessing? Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 1977.
2. Eriksen, T.H. Second Homes in the Nordics. Available online: https://nordics.info/show/artikel/second-homes-in-the-nordics#:
~:text=Second%20homes%20are%20used%20as,and%20an%20abundance%20of%20space (accessed on 10 March 2022).
3. Müller, D.K. Second Homes in the Nordic Countries: Between Common Heritage and Exclusive Commodity. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour.
2007, 7, 193–201. [CrossRef]
4. Müller, D.K. Reinventing the countryside: German second-home owners in Southern Sweden. Curr. Issues Tour. 2002, 5, 426–446.
[CrossRef]
5. Hall, C.M.; Müller, D.K.; Saarinen, J. Nordic Tourism; Issues and Cases; Channel View Publications: Bristol, UK, 2009.
6. Reijo, M. Suomalaisilla käytössä kakkosasuntoja useimmin EU: N alueella. Hyvinvointikatsaus 2002, 2, 20–23. (In Finnish)
7. Jetsonen, J.; Jetsonen, S. Finnish Summer Houses; Princeton Architectural Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008.
8. Pitkänen, K.; Kokki, R. Publications of the Savonlinna Institute for Regional Development and Research No. 11, Non-Faculty
Institutes, Savonlinna Centre for Continuing Education and Regional Development, University of Joensuu Publications. 2005.
Available online: https://erepo.uef.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/8449/urn_isbn_952-458-701-7.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=
y (accessed on 10 March 2022). (In Finnish)
9. Concepts and Definitions, Statistics Finland. Available online: https://www.stat.fi/til/rakke/kas_en.html (accessed on 10 March 2022).
10. Vepsäläinen, M.; Pitkänen, K. Second home countryside: Representations of the rural in Finnish popular discourses. J. Rural. Stud.
2010, 26, 194–204. [CrossRef]
11. Hiltunen, M.J.; Pitkänen, K.; Vepsäläinen, M.; Hall, C.M. Second home tourism in Finland: Current trends and eco-social impacts.
In Second Home Tourism in Europe: Lifestyle Issues and Policy Responses; Roca, Z., Ed.; Ashgate: Farnham, UK, 2013; pp. 165–198.
12. Pitkänen, K.; Puhakka, R.; Semi, J.; Hall, C.M. Generation Y and second homes: Continuity and change in Finnish outdoor
recreation. Tour. Rev. Int. 2014, 18, 207–221. [CrossRef]
13. Adamiak, C.; Vepsäläinen, M.; Strandell, A.; Hiltunen, M.J.; Pitkänen, K.; Hall, C.H.; Rinne, J.; Hannonen, O.; Paloniemi, R.;
Åkerlund, U. Second Home Tourism in Finland Perceptions of Citizens and Municipalities on the State and Development of Second Home
Tourism; Finnish Environment Institute Publications: Helsinki, Finland, 2015.
14. Hiltunen, M.J. Environmental impacts of rural second home tourism–Case Lake district in Finland. Scand. J. Hosp. Tour. 2007, 7,
243–265. [CrossRef]
15. Casado-Diaz, M.A. Socio-demographic impacts of residential tourism: A case study of Torrevieja, Spain. Int. J. Tour. Res. 1999, 1,
223–237. [CrossRef]
16. Mottiar, Z.; Quinn, B. Shaping leisure/tourism places–The role of holiday homeowners: A case study of Courtown, Co. Wexford,
Ireland. Leis. Stud. 2003, 22, 109–127. [CrossRef]
17. Hall, C.M.; Müller, D.K. (Eds.) Tourism, Mobility and Second Homes: Between Elite Landscape and Common Ground; Channel View
Publications: Clevedon, UK, 2004.
18. McIntyre, N.; Williams, D.R.; McHugh, K.E. (Eds.) Multiple Dwelling and Tourism: Negotiating Place, Home and Identity; Cabi:
Wallingford, UK, 2006.
19. Marjavaara, R. Second Home Tourism: The Root to Displacement in Sweden. Gerum 2008: 1; Department of Social and Economic
Geography, Umeå University: Umeå, Sweden, 2008.
20. Karisto, A. Kesämökki ja arjen ympäristöpolitiikka. In Arkielämän Ympäristöpolitiikka; Massa, I., Ahonen, S., Eds.; Gaudeamus:
Helsinki, Finland, 2006; pp. 122–137.
21. OSF. Official Statistics of Finland. Kotitalouksien Käytettävissä Olevat Rahatulot Vuonna 2011. 2013. Available online: http:
//www.stat.fi/til/tjt/2011/03/tjt_2011_03_2013-04-10_kat_001_fi.html>28.6.2013 (accessed on 10 March 2022).
22. Free-Time Residences 2018, Statistics Finland. Available online: https://www.stat.fi/til/rakke/2018/rakke_2018_2019-05-21_
kat_001_en.html (accessed on 10 March 2022).
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 715
23. Finnish Industrial Wastewater Guide, Conveying Non-Domestic Wastewater to Sewers Publication Series No. 69; The Finnish Water
Utilities Association: Helsinki, Finland, 2018; Available online: https://www.vvy.fi/site/assets/files/1110/finnish_industrial_
wastewater_guide.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2022).
24. Laapotti, S. Wood Is a Sustainable Building Material–But There Is a Money Problem to Solve, Unit Magazine, Tampere University.
Available online: https://www.tuni.fi/unit-magazine/en/articles/wood-sustainable-building-material-there-money-problem-
solve (accessed on 10 March 2022).
25. The Finnish Timber Council (Puuinfo). Available online: http://www.puuinfo.fi/puutieto (accessed on 10 March 2022).
26. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E. The Change over Time in Finnish Residents’ Attitudes towards Multi–Story Timber Apartment
Buildings. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5501. [CrossRef]
27. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Metsäranta, L.; Norvasuo, M. Suburban Residents’ Preferences for Livable Residential Area in Finland.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 11841. [CrossRef]
28. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M. Perceptions, Attitudes, and Interest of Architects in the Use of Engineered Wood Products for Construction: A
Review; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021.
29. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Metsäranta, L.; Norvasuo, M. Wooden Facade Renovation and Additional Floor Construction for Suburban
Development in Finland; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2022.
30. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Metsäranta, L.; Norvasuo, M. Residents’ Attitudes towards Wooden Facade Renovation and
Additional Floor Construction in Finland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12316. [CrossRef]
31. Rinne, R.; Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M. Comparative Study on Life-Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprint of Hybrid, Concrete
and Timber Apartment Buildings in Finland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 774. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M. Preliminary Design Proposals for Dovetail Wood Board Elements in Multi-Story Building Construction.
Architecture 2021, 1, 56–68. [CrossRef]
33. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Somelar, D. Wooden Additional Floors in old Apartment Buildings: Perspectives of Housing and
Real Estate Companies from Finland. Buildings 2021, 11, 316. [CrossRef]
34. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M.; Koponen, O. Review of the Current State-of-the-Art of Dovetail Massive Wood Elements; IntechOpen:
London, UK, 2021.
35. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Tulonen, L. Main Design Considerations and Prospects of Contemporary Tall Timber Apartment
Buildings: Views of Key Professionals from Finland. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6593. [CrossRef]
36. Tulonen, L.; Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E. Tall Wooden Residential Buildings in Finland: What Are the Key Factors for Design and
Implementation? IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021.
37. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Yli-Äyhö, M.; Soikkeli, A. Complementary Building Concept: Wooden Apartment Building: The Noppa
toward Zero Energy Building Approach; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021.
38. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M.; Koponen, O. Various Geometric Configuration Proposals for Dovetail Wooden Horizontal Structural Members
in Multistory Building Construction; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2022.
39. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E.; Somelar, D. Wooden Extra Stories in Concrete Block of Flats in Finland as an Ecologically Sensitive
Engineering Solution, Ecological Engineering–Addressing Climate Challenges and Risks; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021.
40. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M.; Koponen, O. Dovetail Massive Wood Board Elements for Multi-Story Buildings. In Proceedings of
the LIVENARCH VII Livable Environments & Architecture 7th International Congress OTHER ARCHITECT/URE(S), Trabzon,
Turkey, 28–30 September 2021; Volume I, pp. 47–60.
41. Karjalainen, M.; Ilgın, H.E. A Statistical Study on Multi-story Timber Residential Buildings (1995–2020) in Finland. In Proceedings
of the LIVENARCH VII Livable Environments & Architecture 7th International Congress OTHER ARCHITECT/URE(S), Trabzon,
Turkey, 28–30 September 2021; Volume I, pp. 82–94.
42. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M.; Koponen, O.; Soikkeli, A. A Study on Contractors’ Perception of Using Wood for Construction; IntechOpen:
London, UK, 2022.
43. Soikkeli, A.; Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M. Wooden Additional Floor in Finland. Encyclopedia 2022, 2, 578–592. [CrossRef]
44. Polina, I. The Designing, Construction, and Maintenance of Honka Log Houses. Guidelines for Russian Customers. Master’s
Thesis, Lappeenranta Degree Program in Civil and Construction Engineering, Saimaa University of Applied Sciences Technology,
South Karelia, Finland, 2010.
45. Poortinga, W.; Bird, N.; Hallingberg, B.; Phillips, R.; Williams, D. The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective
health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 211, 104092. [CrossRef]
46. Kraatari, E. Finnish Cottage Industry and Cultural Policy: A Historical View. Nord. Kult. Tidskr. 2013, 16, 137–152. [CrossRef]
47. Aho, S.; Ilola, H. Another Home in the Country? Second Housing and Rural Vitality; Faculty of Economics and Tourism, University of
Lapland Publications: Rovaniemi, Finland, 2006. (In Finnish)
48. Lithander, J.; Tynelius, U.; Malmsten, P.; Råboc, I.; Fransson, E. Rural Housing–Landsbygdsboende i Norge, Sverige och Finland.
Tillväxtanalys, Rapport 05. Östersund. Nordic Council of Ministers. 2012. Available online: http://www.tillvaxtanalys.se/
download/18.56ef093c139bf3ef89029cb/1349864058705/Rapport_2012_05.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2022).
49. Häkkänen, L.; Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M. The Current State of the Finnish Cottage Phenomenon: Perspectives of Experts.
Buildings 2022, 12, 260. [CrossRef]
50. Overvåg, K. Second homes and urban growth in the Oslo area, Norway. Nor. Geogr. Tidskr. Nor. J. Geogr. 2009, 63, 154–165.
[CrossRef]
Encyclopedia 2022, 2 716
51. Müller, D.K.; Nordin, U.; Marjavaara, R. Fritidsboendes Relationer Till den Svenska Landsbygden. Resultat av en Enkät Bland Svenska
Fritidshusägare 2009; GERUM Kulturgeografisk Arbetsrapport 2010-04-15; Kulturgeografiska Institutionen, Umeå Universitet:
Umeå, Sweden, 2010.
52. Hiltunen, M.J.; Rehunen, A. Second home mobility in Finland: Patterns, practices and relations of leisure oriented mobile lifestyle.
Fennia 2014, 192, 1–22. [CrossRef]
53. Rinne, J.; Paloniemi, R.; Tuulentie, S.; Kietäväinen, A. Participation of second-home users in local planning and decision-making—A
study of three cottage-rich locations in Finland. J. Policy Res. Tour. Leis. Events 2015, 7, 98–114. [CrossRef]
54. Mouratidis, K. How COVID-19 reshaped quality of life in cities: A synthesis and implications for urban planning. Land Use Policy
2021, 111, 105772. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
55. Ilgın, H.E.; Karjalainen, M.; Pelsmakers, S. Finnish architects’ attitudes towards multi–storey timber–Residential buildings. Int. J.
Build. Pathol. Adapt. 2021, in press. [CrossRef]
56. Batty, M. The Coronavirus crisis: What will the post-pandemic city look like? Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47,
547–552. [CrossRef]
57. Zog˘al, V.; Domènech, A.; Emekli, G. Stay at (which) home: Second homes during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Tour.
Futures 2020, in press. [CrossRef]
58. Gallent, N. Covid-19 and the flight to second homes. Town Ctry. Plan. 2020, 89, 141–144.
59. Grigoryev, L.M. Global social drama of pandemic and recession. Popul. Econ. 2020, 4, 18–25. [CrossRef]
60. Nikolaeva, U.G.; Rusanov, A.V. Self-isolation at the dacha: Can’t? Can? Have to? Popul. Econ. 2020, 4, 182–198. [CrossRef]
61. Seraphin, H.; Dosquet, F. Mountain tourism and second home tourism as post COVID- 19 lockdown placebo? Worldw. Hosp. Tour.
Themes 2020, 12, 485–500. [CrossRef]
62. Pitkänen, K.; Hannonen, O.; Toso, S.; Gallent, N.; Hamiduddin, I.; Halseth, G.; Hall, C.M.; Müller, D.K.; Treivish, A.; Nevedova, T.
Second homes during Corona—Safe or unsafe haven and for whom? Reflections from researchers around the world. Finn. J. Tour.
Res. 2020, 16, 20–39. [CrossRef]
63. Corley, J.; Okely, J.A.; Taylor, A.M.; Page, D.; Welstead, M.; Skarabela, B.; Russ, T.C. Home garden use during COVID-19:
Associations with physical and mental wellbeing in older adults. J. Environ. Psychol. 2021, 73, 101545. [CrossRef]
64. Lehberger, M.; Kleih, A.-K.; Sparke, K. Self-reported well-being and the importance of green spaces—A comparison of garden
owners and non-garden owners in times of COVID-19. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 212, 104108. [CrossRef]
65. Bieger, T.; Weinert, R.; Klumbies, A. COVID-19 and Second Home Prices in Switzerland: An Empirical Insight. Z. Für Tour. 2021,
13, 375–386. [CrossRef]
66. From Villa Ownership to National Leisure-Time Activity, Statistics Finland. Available online: https://www.stat.fi/tup/suomi90/
kesakuu_en.html (accessed on 10 March 2022).
67. Free-Time Residences 2020, Statistics Finland. Available online: https://www.stat.fi/til/rakke/2020/rakke_2020_2021-05-27_
kat_001_en.html (accessed on 10 March 2022).
68. FCG Finnish Consulting Group Oy. Advisory Board for Finnish Archipelago Affairs Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Cottage
Barometer. 2016. Available online: https://mmm.fi/documents/1410837/1880296/Mokkibarometri+2016/7b69ab48-5859-4b5
5-8dc2-5514cdfa6000 (accessed on 10 March 2022). (In Finnish)