Looking at the documentation on those -

"Industrialized Building In the Soviet Union" (1969) - "Panels and slabs average 5 tons up to a maximum of 10 tons. Transportation is considered within economic limits if factory to job site is no more than 150 kilometres"

Which is what the original article says on pre-fab -

"Because of transportation costs, they are all limited to selling within a few hundred miles of their factory."

They were also considered disposable in the USSR, and no one wants to live in them. Also talked about in the article, it's a good article give it a read.

These are quite common in Finland, not just Rovaniemi (which does not really have extraordinary cost of living unless you have electric heating). So, here's how I see it:

- When whole new neighborhoods are built, it's not unusual to start with building a factory to manufacture the elements. For smaller projects there's usually a factory within 150 kilometers. This is not Siberia.

- There's always insulation and outer wall on top of the panels. The result is not always pretty, but not necessarily worse than concrete poured on site.

- The construction crews aren't always competent and there are many ways to screw up a concrete cast. Quality wise both precast and on site casting have their own problems.

- The seams between element need periodic repair. If the house owners decide to save money here, it's going to be expensive later. They're also a huge sound insulation problem.

The article mentions those. There's a reason they are not used much outside of parking garages.

In some cities in Europe as much as 97% of population lives in those and they rise in value faster than other types of housing there.

Article dismisses them unjustly.

modern plattenbau is used extensively in Europa. almost all modern construction uses pre made segments.

it doesn't look the same as a Soviet era building project, but the technology and system is roughly the same.