Summary (English):Current planning policies place great expectations on citizen participation to resolve complex societal and spatial challenges such as urban renewal and housing development. This essay explores what transitions in citizen participation have taken place on this issue in the Netherlands and to what extent citizen participation in its current form can address the complex socio-spatial challenge of providing affordable housing in cities.The essay introduces a paradox of the transition in participation in housing development in the Netherlands as part of broader transformations in Dutch spatial planning and development: in spite of increased institutionalization of participation, the actual citizens seem to have been served less and less. There is potential for the inclusion of citizen participation in the planning processes to encourage acceptance where resource distribution creates conflicts (i.e. affordable housing markets and lack of supply) for more effective cooperation during implementation. However, giving citizens more say in small parcels of spatial development does not disguise and overrule the structural forces in policy and real estate market trends that have grown in the last decades and push out lower and middle income groups from the city.This essay reviews state-of-the-art literature on the evolution of citizen participation, co-creation, and decision-making structures and processes in spatial planning and housing, and discusses participation trajectories in urban developments with housing functions in Amsterdam (Havenstraatterrein, Marineterrein) and Groningen (Suikerunie, Ebbinge), and Almere (Oosterwold) to showcase the paradoxical transition.__Summary (Dutch):Participatie krijgt een steeds prominentere rol in het oplossen van complexe maatschappelijke en ruimtelijke uitdagingen, zoals stedelijke vernieuwing en de ontwikkeling van woningen. Dit essay verkent welke veranderingen zich hebben voorgedaan in de rol die burgers spelen in woningontwikkeling in Nederland en in hoeverre participatie in de huidige vorm helpt om voldoende betaalbare woonruimte te ontwikkelen in de stad.Het essay schetst een paradoxale transitie op het gebied van participatie in de woningbouw in Nederland. De transitie is onderdeel is van grotere veranderingen in ruimtelijke ordening en ruimtelijke ontwikkeling in Nederland. Ondanks toenemende aandacht voor en institutionalisering van participatie in plan- en ontwikkelingsprocessen, lijkt het erop dat de burger die het meest de hulp van de overheid nodig heeft om passende woonruimte te vinden, steeds meer het nakijken heeft gekregen. Burgers een grotere rol geven in de planprocesen en planuitvoering kan helpen de acceptatie van plannen waarin schaarse middelen worden verdeeld, te vergroten. Tot nu toe echter blijft de inspraak van burgers beperkt tot kleine, specifieke gebieden. Deze uitzonderingen bieden onvoldoende tegenwicht aan de structurele krachten in beleid, grond- en vastgoedmarkten die midden- en lagere inkomens de afgelopen jaren steeds verder de stad uit hebben gedreven.Dit essay schetst op basis van literatuurstudie de grote lijnen in de ontwikkeling van woningontwikkeling en participatie sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Op basis daarvan beschouwt het essay de ontwikkeling van participatie, co-creatie en besluitvorming in gebiedsontwikkeling in Amsterdam (Havenstraatterrein, Marineterrein), Groningen (Suikerunie, Ebbinge) en Almere (Oosterwold) om de paradoxale transitie die plaatsvindt in participatie in gebiedsontwikkeling en woningbouw te illustreren.
Energy efficiency has gained a lot of prominence in recent debates on urban sustainability and housing policy due to its potential consequences for climate change. At the local, national and also international level, there are numerous initiatives to promote energy savings and the use of renewable energy to reduce the environmental burden. There is a lot of literature on energy saving and other forms of energy efficiency in housing. However, how to bring this forward in the management of individual housing organisations is not often internationally explored. An international research project has been carried out to find the answers on management questions of housing organisations regarding energy efficiency. Eleven countries have been included in this study: Germany, the United Kingdom (more specifically: England), France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Austria and Canada. The state of the art of energy efficiency in the housing management of non-profit housing organisations and the embedding of energy efficiency to improve the quality and performance of housing in management practices have been investigated, with a focus on how policy ambitions about energy efficiency are brought forward in investment decisions at the estate level. This paper presents the conclusions of the research
Since the financial and administrative liberalisation from the government in the late 1980s and the 1990s, the Dutch housing associations have been very dynamic, regarding the considerable extension of both commercial and social activities, the increased reliance and dependence on market circumstances, and the large number of amalgamations, creating bigger organisations. In recent years the Dutch social housing sector is under increased pressure as a consequence of the credit crunch, increased tax levies and the national implementation in the sector of EU regulations on ‘Services of General Economic Interest’. Factors like these are likely to have an effect on the organisational strategies of housing associations, the main providers of social housing in the Netherlands. The direction and the size of these effects, however, are not well known. A recent inquiry among housing associations sheds more light on this. In this paper, we make use of a classification including a socialcommercial dimension and a dimension between so-called ‘prospectors’ and ‘defenders’. This classification proves to be an adequate tool to describe the recent developments in the sector. It is concluded that, in general, housing associations are focussing more on traditional social housing tasks and ‘defending’ strategies, implying a shift back compared to the trend in recent decades.
