Search

Abstract: In the Netherlands the regeneration of post-war urban districts is closely intertwined with the role of housing associations. This is hardly surprising, given that the housing associations have such a large share of the market (usually over 50%; sometimes nearly 100%) in many early post-war urban districts. This has caused a growing concentration of low-income households in those urban areas and a selective migration by middle- and high-income households from the city to the suburb. Official government policy on housing and urban renewal is directed at a redifferentiation of the urban housing stock. Specifically, the policy promotes more owner-occupation, larger and higher-quality homes, and a greater percentage of homes with a garden. This implies the demolition of social housing estates and selling social housing. The position of housing associations in the regeneration of Dutch post-war urban districts is somewhat enigmatic. On the one hand, national government is expecting them to take initiative and invest in urban renewal; on the other, government is urging them to cut down their market share. How are housing associations coping with this paradoxical challenge? And what are the current national policies about the position of housing associations? Aedes (the umbrella organisation of Dutch housing associations) and the Dutch Ministry of Housing have agreed upon the so-called great transition of housing associations. Here we explain and critique this great transition, which will hamper the current regeneration of Dutch urban districts. As an alternative we present the new transition.

Without Abstract:

Abstract: Housing policy in the European Union is the exclusive domain of national governments. European authorities, however, are using their powers in the area of competition more and more to exert a far-reaching influence on policy areas where the Member States should be autonomous.In the Netherlands the Housing Act of 1901 forms the public framework for housing associations, which combine public functions with more or less commercial activities. These hybrid organizations fulfil in the Netherlands the public function not only of housing the households with modest incomes, but also of fostering variety in the housing stock and reducing spatial segregation. Apparently the European Commission underestimates the significance and logic of hybrid organizations. It is important that Member States exercise their autonomous right to shape their own housing policies to the full. European competition policy, in itself a necessary and useful policy domain, must not be misused to thwart national housing aspirations.

In Dutch urban renewal, we observe an implementation gap between dreaming and doing. Dutch national government recently proposed to focus urban renewal on more than 50 priority areas in the cities and to reduce urban renewal subsidies. It is not very likely that this policy will accelerate urban renewal. This contribution suggests a different approach: the formulation of an urban district vision shared by the sustainable stakeholders in those districts. If they can come to an agreement, they deserve housing association finance and public urban renewal support. By targeting the plans primarily on the social climbers in the urban districts involved, the city can keep their buying power within the city. Combining physical, social, economic and safety agendas and adopting a multi-functional orientation would seem to be a successful strategy.

Recently a discussion flared up in the Netherlands on the effectivenessand efficiency of providers of social housing. Though most people feel that Dutch housing associations are run effectively, there are no data to underpin this conclusion. The government is not clear about the criteria for each housing association: most of the criteria are unquantified and, to some extent, contradictory. Nor is it clear whether every individual housing association has to meet these criteriato the same extent. Many more doubts have been raised about the efficiencyof social housing providers, as housing associations do not act as if theywant to maximize profits. Several suggestions have been put forward to improve efficiency: periodicalexternal visitations, benchmarking, the introduction of a Real Estate Index,and outsourcing a substantial part of the management and development activities. The main conclusion so far is that we are under-informed aboutthe efficiency of housing associations. Some advisory bodies argue that theoverall efficiency of housing associations would improve if they were transferred from the semi-public to the private sector. They claim that thedemand side of the housing market could be strengthened by the introductionof housing vouchers and suggest that housing associations opt out of the public sector. These options fail to take account of the fact that we are insufficiently informed about the efficiency of commercial players on the housing market and the inherent shortcomings of free housing markets when it comes to accessibility, affordability and quality for low-income households, externaleffects and the cherry-picking of tenants by commercial landlords. Hence, weconclude that until more information is available on the true effectivenessand efficiency of housing associations, there are good reasons to continue their current hybrid status, which combines public tasks and market activities.

Without Abstract:

Without Abstract:

Without Abstract: