Balancing Accumulation and Affordability: How Dutch Housing Politics Moved from Private-Rental Liberalization to Regulation

IF 2.5 3区 经济学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
C. Hochstenbach
{"title":"Balancing Accumulation and Affordability: How Dutch Housing Politics Moved from Private-Rental Liberalization to Regulation","authors":"C. Hochstenbach","doi":"10.1080/14036096.2023.2218863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper answers the question why the Dutch state has gone from vigorously stimulating private-rental growth and liberalization to actively restricting the tenure. Answering this question is important in understanding an emergent wave of more restrictive, or even “post-neoliberal” housing policies across countries. This paper presents an analysis of the changing private-rental politics in the period following the Great Financial Crisis, combined with a quantitative study of renters’ housing outcomes. The central argument is that policies promoting private-rental growth and liberalization and the subsequent turn restrictive policies are both outcomes of the state seeking to balance the property-led accumulation with middle-class residential demands. Supportive policies were the result of a presumed alignment of the interests of capital, the state and the middle classes, but ongoing liberalization has undermined middle-class housing affordability – revealing a key tension between capital and middle-class interests. This tension triggered new, more restrictive policies.","PeriodicalId":47433,"journal":{"name":"Housing Theory & Society","volume":"40 1","pages":"503 - 529"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Housing Theory & Society","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14036096.2023.2218863","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper answers the question why the Dutch state has gone from vigorously stimulating private-rental growth and liberalization to actively restricting the tenure. Answering this question is important in understanding an emergent wave of more restrictive, or even “post-neoliberal” housing policies across countries. This paper presents an analysis of the changing private-rental politics in the period following the Great Financial Crisis, combined with a quantitative study of renters’ housing outcomes. The central argument is that policies promoting private-rental growth and liberalization and the subsequent turn restrictive policies are both outcomes of the state seeking to balance the property-led accumulation with middle-class residential demands. Supportive policies were the result of a presumed alignment of the interests of capital, the state and the middle classes, but ongoing liberalization has undermined middle-class housing affordability – revealing a key tension between capital and middle-class interests. This tension triggered new, more restrictive policies.
平衡积累和负担能力:荷兰住房政策如何从私人租赁自由化走向监管
摘要本文回答了荷兰政府为何从大力刺激私人租赁增长和自由化转变为积极限制租赁权的问题。回答这个问题对于理解各国新出现的限制性甚至“后新自由主义”住房政策浪潮很重要。本文分析了大金融危机后私人租赁政治的变化,并对租房者的住房结果进行了定量研究。核心论点是,促进私人租赁增长和自由化的政策以及随后的转向限制政策都是国家寻求平衡房地产主导的积累与中产阶级住房需求的结果。支持性政策是假定资本、国家和中产阶级利益一致的结果,但持续的自由化削弱了中产阶级的住房负担能力,揭示了资本和中产阶级之间的关键紧张关系。这种紧张局势引发了新的、限制性更强的政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
28
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信