在戰爭持續的背景下，基輔房價不但沒有如一般直覺所預期的下跌，反而呈現上升趨勢，其核心原因並不在於經濟景氣好轉，而是源自戰爭所引發的「安全避險需求」與長期供需結構失衡。同時，營建成本大幅上漲與貨幣通膨壓力交織，共同推動房價走高，形成一種在非常時期才會出現的特殊房市現象。

首先，戰爭對人口流動的影響是房價上升的最直接因素。隨著前線地區風險不斷升高，大量民眾被迫離開東部與戰事頻繁地帶，轉而湧入相對安全的區域，特別是西部城市以及首都基輔。基輔不僅擁有較完善的防空系統與基礎設施，同時也是政府運作、外交機構與國際組織的集中地，安全邊際相對較高。在這樣的情況下，居住需求呈現高度集中，短時間內急遽推升對住房的需求量。

然而，需求增加的同時，供給端卻因戰爭而遭到嚴重壓縮，形成明顯的供需失衡。戰時環境下，營建材料的供應鏈頻繁中斷，鋼材、水泥、能源與進口設備價格大幅上漲，整體營建成本幾乎翻倍。同時，大量勞工被徵召入伍、外移或無法穩定工作，使建築人力極度短缺，許多新建案被迫停工、延宕，甚至直接取消。新房供給量因此急速萎縮，使市場上可交易的住宅變得更加稀缺。

在宏觀經濟層面，貨幣貶值與通膨壓力也改變了民眾對資產配置的看法。在戰爭與不確定性之下，金融資產波動加劇，貨幣購買力持續下滑，反而使得位於首都、具備相對安全性的實體不動產，被視為一種「抗通膨」與「保值」的避險工具。對部分仍具資金實力的本地人士、企業主或海外烏克蘭人而言，購買基輔房產不再只是居住需求，而是一種對抗貨幣風險的實體資產配置選擇。

此外，租金市場的變化也進一步強化房價的支撐力。大量人口湧入基輔，使短期與長期租賃需求同步上升，租金水準明顯上漲。在房屋供給有限的情況下，租金的成長直接推高房產的投資報酬率預期，吸引部分資金進一步進入購屋市場，形成租金與房價相互推升的循環。

綜合來看，儘管戰爭仍在持續，但基輔作為烏克蘭的政治、行政與國際往來核心，其安全性、資源集中度與功能不可替代性，使其在全國範圍內具備相對突出的安全邊際。在人口集中、供給萎縮、成本上升與避險需求交織的特殊結構下，基輔房價不僅得以撐住，甚至在某些區域出現逆勢上升的現象，成為戰時經濟下極具代表性的城市房市案例。

Despite the continuation of the war, housing prices in Kyiv have not declined as many might intuitively expect. Instead, they have risen. The core driver behind this phenomenon is not economic recovery, but a surge in “security-driven demand” that has severely distorted the supply–demand balance. This dynamic has been further reinforced by sharply rising construction costs and persistent monetary inflation, creating a rare real estate environment shaped by wartime conditions.

The most immediate factor is the impact of the war on population movements. As frontline risks intensified, large numbers of residents were forced to leave eastern and conflict-prone regions and relocate to relatively safer areas, particularly western cities and the capital, Kyiv. Kyiv offers comparatively stronger air-defense coverage, more resilient infrastructure, and serves as the center of government operations, diplomatic missions, and international organizations. These attributes give the city a higher perceived security margin, causing residential demand to concentrate rapidly within a short period of time.

At the same time, housing supply has been severely constrained by the war, producing a pronounced imbalance. Wartime disruptions to supply chains have driven sharp increases in the cost of construction materials such as steel, cement, energy, and imported equipment. In many cases, overall construction costs have nearly doubled. Labor shortages have compounded the problem, as large numbers of workers have been conscripted, displaced, or unable to maintain stable employment. As a result, many development projects have been suspended, delayed, or canceled altogether, drastically reducing the supply of new housing.

From a macroeconomic perspective, currency depreciation and inflation have also reshaped asset-allocation behavior. Under conditions of prolonged uncertainty, financial assets have become more volatile while purchasing power has continued to erode. In contrast, physical real estate in Kyiv—located in the country’s political and security core—has increasingly been viewed as an inflation hedge and a store of value. For domestic buyers with remaining capital, business owners, and members of the Ukrainian diaspora, purchasing property in Kyiv has shifted from a purely residential decision to a strategic move to protect wealth against currency risk.

Changes in the rental market have further strengthened price support. The influx of population into Kyiv has driven up both short-term and long-term rental demand, pushing rents significantly higher. With housing supply tightly constrained, rising rents have directly improved expected investment returns, drawing additional capital into the purchase market and creating a reinforcing cycle between rental yields and property prices.

In summary, although the war continues, Kyiv’s role as Ukraine’s political, administrative, and international hub provides it with a relative security advantage over other regions, particularly the east. Within this unique structure—characterized by population concentration, shrinking supply, rising costs, and strong demand for safe-haven assets—Kyiv’s housing market has remained resilient and, in certain areas, has even moved upward. This makes Kyiv a striking example of how real estate markets can behave counterintuitively under wartime economic conditions.