Search

This paper, presenting evidence from the Netherlands, aims to connect two issues that are mostly dealt with in isolation: the development of the squatters’ movement and the increasing vacancy of offices in urban areas. As a result of overproduction of office space, the shrinking number of employed people and the growing popularity of the so-called ‘new working arrangements’, the vacancy of offices in urban areas is increasing quickly. Urban managers are faced with a significant challenge of managing these empty spaces and this paper discusses how squatting, despite an unsupportive legislative environment, has historically proliferated when vacancy rates rise. In order to understand contemporary policy debates surrounding this issue, this paper first sets out a brief history of the squatters’ movement in the Netherlands, Europe and elsewhere. Dutch government has wrestled with the squatting issue since 1976 and has tried to control this movement by legislation. Hence, the paper provides a critical overview of legislative and practical developments affecting squatters in the Netherlands, particularly in their occupation of vacant office space. Finally, the paper considers how vacant office space might be used more effectively to provide affordable housing, with a particular focus on the role of squatting. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Tenants in the Netherlands not only pay relatively more for their housing consumption than owner-occupiers, but also appear to be subject to Schwabe's law on rent. This law states that households with a lower income are confronted with higher rent-to-income ratios than households with a higher income. In the Netherlands most rents are regulated, so these are expected to be at below-market levels. Tenants of these dwellings are eligible for housing allowances if their income is considered insufficient for paying the rent. The hypothesis is that a rental dwelling with a regulated rent and for which the tenant receives a housing allowance should be affordable to the tenant. However, as this paper shows, even a maximum degree of government intervention (rent regulation and housing allowances) plus the impact of affordable rent setting by landlords, leading to a maximum subsidisation of the tenant, cannot prevent a situation whereby tenants are paying an unaffordable rent. And an unaffordable rent suggests that these tenants may indeed feel impacted by housing affordability problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2010 a working party made up of Dutch civil servants suggested a tool known as the ‘National Residential Property Tax’ with the aim of strengthening the public budget. Initially, this was intended as a tenure-neutral tax for both the owner-occupier and the rented sector. However, in the 2012 Coalition Agreement between the conservatives (VVD) and the social democrats (PvdA) it was narrowed down to a levy for landlords of properties with regulated rents – and thus ended up as a specific tax largely targeted at housing associations. On the one hand, the new government was offering housing association opportunities for annual rent increases above the rate of inflation but, on the other hand, it was getting ready to cream off the extra revenue to alleviate its own budgetary problems. By 2017 this new levy will have risen to 1.7 billion euros annually. This paper explains the background to this unique Dutch housing policy instrument and presents an ex ante evaluation of the impact of the landlord levy on housing associations, commercial real estate investors and tenants. It will also offer some conclusions and policy recommendations for housing policy in the Netherlands, which could be relevant for other European countries as well. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Comparing USA and Dutch experiences, this paper seeks to determine whether the demolition of public or social housing results in negative spillover effects, i.e. the shift of crime and other social problems to nearby neighbourhoods, as a result of residential relocation patterns. Notwithstanding fundamental contextual differences, existing research shows that many relocatees do recluster in low-income areas not much better than the public or social housing sites they moved from. Furthermore, USA and Dutch research highlights concern among public officials, politicians and community activists that this clustering is resulting in higher crime, increased neighbourhood dissatisfaction (among existing residents), more conflicts between residents, lower school test scores, etc. Few researchers have, however, been able to go beyond correlations and establish cause–effect relations between the in-movement of public/social housing relocatees and increased social problems. Attempts to identify a statistical threshold for clustering, beyond which negative effects occur, have not been successful. Nevertheless, existing evidence regarding negative spillover effects is compelling enough to warrant expanded and improved monitoring of both relocation and neighbourhood change patterns and to initiate programmes to address the concerns of residents in destination areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between 1997 and 2012 temporary tenancies emerged and evolved as a pragmatic policy instrument within the Dutch housing sector. In this article, based on analyses of policy documents, media content and parliamentary archives, we argue that this was a period of implicit, technocratic erosion of the existing permanent rental norm, creating the political and material foundations for the emergence of a new, more explicit ideological discourse that has been evident since 2013. We then explore these most recent developments, in which temporary tenancies are now championed as a catalyst for structural housing market reform, and comment on the possibility that the recent proposal to introduce time-limited tenancies as a normal form of tenure, will lead to permanent, rather than temporary, contracts becoming marginal in Dutch society. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Societies are trying to cope with ageing and the consequences of the global financial crisis. In most societies collective welfare arrangements for the elderly are under pressure, and drawing on housing equity can be considered as a potential source of augmenting one's pension and financing one's care in old age. This article explores the way in which housing equity is perceived as a financial back-up for old age in Hungary and the Netherlands: two completely different contexts. Hungary and the Netherlands are at opposite poles in many respects when it comes to old age and the role of owner-occupation. In Hungary the large majority of the population is owner-occupier, in the Netherlands the proportion is much smaller. In Hungary most home owners are outright owners; in the Netherlands they invariably have a mortgage. These differences appear to impact on household strategies. In Hungary housing equity plays a key role in the financial strategies of families, whereas it plays only a minor role in the Netherlands. Moving to the rental sector to release housing equity appears an obvious strategy in the Netherlands, whereas this strategy is non-existent in Hungary. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]