{"title":"无声的转变?荷兰租赁住房市场的不稳定。","authors":"Carla Jacqueline Huisman","doi":"10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The traditional Dutch rental contract is permanent (i.e. time unlimited), but there are indications that in recent years the number of temporary rental contracts has increased considerably. Dutch housing policy appears to be responding to this by pursuing deregulation of the conditions under which temporary rent is permitted. It is in this regard startling that there is no reliable data available about the size or character of the temporary sector, and it has thus far not attracted any scholarly attention. Given that temporary rent can be viewed as a form of precarisation, a transfer of risk to citizens, with corresponding negative effects on the lives of those involved, it is imperative to close this knowledge gap. This paper is a first attempt to do this. Firstly, I systematically review the scarce evidence that is currently available, and secondly, I explore why the rise of temporary rent has thus far failed to stimulate any social debate; it appears to constitute a silent precarisation that contrasts with the politically sensitive issue of labour precarisation. In doing so, I will identify the research questions that must be answered if the significance of this process for both tenants and wider welfare-state restructuring is to be fully understood.</p>","PeriodicalId":73781,"journal":{"name":"Journal of housing and the built environment : HBE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A silent shift? The precarisation of the Dutch rental housing market.\",\"authors\":\"Carla Jacqueline Huisman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The traditional Dutch rental contract is permanent (i.e. time unlimited), but there are indications that in recent years the number of temporary rental contracts has increased considerably. Dutch housing policy appears to be responding to this by pursuing deregulation of the conditions under which temporary rent is permitted. It is in this regard startling that there is no reliable data available about the size or character of the temporary sector, and it has thus far not attracted any scholarly attention. Given that temporary rent can be viewed as a form of precarisation, a transfer of risk to citizens, with corresponding negative effects on the lives of those involved, it is imperative to close this knowledge gap. This paper is a first attempt to do this. Firstly, I systematically review the scarce evidence that is currently available, and secondly, I explore why the rise of temporary rent has thus far failed to stimulate any social debate; it appears to constitute a silent precarisation that contrasts with the politically sensitive issue of labour precarisation. In doing so, I will identify the research questions that must be answered if the significance of this process for both tenants and wider welfare-state restructuring is to be fully understood.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of housing and the built environment : HBE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of housing and the built environment : HBE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/5/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of housing and the built environment : HBE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-015-9446-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A silent shift? The precarisation of the Dutch rental housing market.
The traditional Dutch rental contract is permanent (i.e. time unlimited), but there are indications that in recent years the number of temporary rental contracts has increased considerably. Dutch housing policy appears to be responding to this by pursuing deregulation of the conditions under which temporary rent is permitted. It is in this regard startling that there is no reliable data available about the size or character of the temporary sector, and it has thus far not attracted any scholarly attention. Given that temporary rent can be viewed as a form of precarisation, a transfer of risk to citizens, with corresponding negative effects on the lives of those involved, it is imperative to close this knowledge gap. This paper is a first attempt to do this. Firstly, I systematically review the scarce evidence that is currently available, and secondly, I explore why the rise of temporary rent has thus far failed to stimulate any social debate; it appears to constitute a silent precarisation that contrasts with the politically sensitive issue of labour precarisation. In doing so, I will identify the research questions that must be answered if the significance of this process for both tenants and wider welfare-state restructuring is to be fully understood.