Search

The Dutch housing market suffered more than many other West-European housing markets from the global financial crisis. After some stimulation measures at the beginning of the crisis, the market was hit hard by several government policies in both the rented and the owner-occupied sectors. Against this background this paper pays attention to the disfunctioning of the Dutch housing market and to current housing issues which are high on the political agenda. The paper argues that the contemporary Dutch housing market serves as an engine for social inequality and leads to sharp divisions and instability in society, in social, political and in economic terms. The paper then offers some solutions for these significant housing market problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

This paper compares rental housing tools in the US, Britain and the Netherlands in order to determine the best strategy for enhancing rental housing accessibility. In doing so, the authors employ a 'tools approach' of governance paradigm, based on the work of Salamon's The Tools of Governance (2002). Rental housing tools are called housing vouchers in the US, housing benefits in Britain and housing allowances in the Netherlands. Overall, it was found that Britain and the Netherlands can learn from the US on means and ways of designing more efficient and fiscally responsible housing vouchers, benefits, and allowances (VBAs). The US, in turn, can learn from Britain and the Netherlands on means and needs of achieving higher equity and effectiveness. This analysis contributes in a meaningful way by addressing the missing middle link between policies and programs - namely, the tools perspective. [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]