Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Neighbourhood Based Policies in the Netherlands: Counteracting Neighbourhood Effects?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Neighbourhood Effects or Neighbourhood Based Problems?

Abstract

Gideon Bolt and Ronald van Kempen explore neighbourhood level policy in The Netherlands showing how interest in neighbourhood based problems has changed over the past 40 years. In the 1970s and 1980s the focus was mainly on improving the physical quality of the neighbourhood by means of demolition of derelict housing. Social problems and problems associated with concentration and segregation were hardly mentioned. Urban renewal was based on the principle of ‘building for the neighbourhood residents’. From the second half of the 1980s onwards, policymakers became more aware of the fact that physical renewal alone was insufficient to solve the social and economic problems in neighbourhoods and that it was equally important to address economic, social, cultural and environmental factors. Since 2001 the debate on the social mix changed in tone and the problems associated with spatial concentrations of minority ethnic groups were featured explicitly, for instance in the influential Memorandum of a commission that investigated the effectiveness of Dutch integration policy. However, despite successive policies aimed at the promotion of social mix, the authors demonstrate that the housing policies of successive governments have led to an increase in both income and ethnic segregation in Utrecht and the Hague. Policy investments in priority neighbourhoods have not been effective in counterbalancing these segregationist tendencies. In conclusion they highlight that there is a puzzling paradox in the Dutch debate on anti-segregation policy. On the one hand, there is a lot of discussion about measures that should reduce segregation (restructuring policy, Rotterdam law), although their effect is limited. On the other hand there is lack of attention for the segregationist effects of other policy measures (planning of new housing estates, Right to Buy, limiting the access of median incomes to social housing) that were not enforced with the aim to affect segregation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The fear of parallel communities is also theme that also plays a role in the discourse on integration in other European countries, like the UK (Phillips 2006) or Germany (Gruner 2010).

  2. 2.

    Moreover, the break-up of the coalition (April, 2012) will probably lead to the withdrawal of the law.

  3. 3.

    The term greenfield location refers to undeveloped land in a city or rural area, commonly used for agriculture. The advantage of developing greenfield areas is that there is no need to remodel or demolish an existing structure. In the Netherlands, most greenfield locations that are being developed can be found at the outskirts of the city.

  4. 4.

    A new housing estate is defined as a neighbourhood were at least 1,000 dwellings haven been built in the period 1999–2004 and where at least 80 % of the dwellings are built in that period.

  5. 5.

    Priority neighbourhoods are the 40 areas that were assigned by the Minister of Housing in 2007.

References

  • Beaumont, J., Burgers, J., Dekker, K., Dukes, T., Musterd, S., Staring, R., & van Kempen, R. (2003). Urban policies in the Netherlands. In P. de Decker, J. Vranken, J. Beaumont, & I. Van Nieuwenhuyze (Eds.), On the origins of urban development programmes in nine European countries (pp. 119–137). Antwerpen/Apeldoorn: Garant Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G. (2004). Over spreidingsbeleid en drijfzand [On dispersal policy and quicksand]. Migrantenstudies, 20(2), 60–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G. (2009). Combating residential segregation of ethnic minorities in European cities. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 24(4), 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., & Van Kempen, R. (2002). Wonen in multiculturele steden [Living in multicultural cities]. The Hague: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., & van Kempen, R. (2010a). Dispersal patterns of households who are forced to move: Desegregation by demolition: A case study of Dutch cities. Housing Studies, 25(2), 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., & van Kempen, R. (2010b). Segregatie: recente ontwikkelingen in zes stadsgewesten [Segregation: recent developments in six urban regions]. In F. van Dam et al. (Eds.), Nieuwbouw, verhuizingen en segregatie – Effecten van nieuwbouw op de bevolkingssamenstelling van stadswijken (pp. 89–106). Den Haag/Bilthoven: Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., & van Kempen, R. (2011). Succesful mixing? Effects of urban restructuring policies in Dutch neighbourhoods. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 102(3), 361–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., Burgers, J., & van Kempen, R. (1998). On the social significance of spatial location; spatial segregation and social inclusion. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 13(1), 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., Van Kempen, R., & Van Ham, M. (2008). Minority ethnic groups in the Dutch housing market: spatial segregation, relocation dynamics and housing policy. Urban Studies, 45(7), 1359–1384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., van Kempen, R., & van Weesep, J. (2009). After urban restructuring: relocations and segregation in Dutch cities. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 100(4), 502–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, G., Özüekren, A. S., & Phillips, D. (2010). Linking integration and residential segregation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(2), 169–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boschman, S. (2012). Residential segregation and interethnic contact in the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 49(2), 353–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck, N. (2001). Identifying neighbourhood effects on social exclusion. Urban Studies, 38(12), 2251–2275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çağlar, A. S. (2001). Constraining metaphors and the transnationalisation of spaces in Berlin. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 27(4), 601–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, A., Van der Broek, L., Declerck, S., Klaver, S., & Vernooij, F. (2008). Regionale woningmarktgebieden, verschillen en overeenkomsten [Regional housing markets, differences and similarities]. Rotterdam/Den Haag: NAi/RPB.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Kam, G., & Needham, B. (2003). Een hele opgave. Over sociale cohesie als motief bij stedelijke herstructurering [A big challenge. Social cohesion as motive for urban restructuring]. Den Haag/Utrecht: DGW/NETHUR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doff, W. (2010). Puzzling neighbourhood effects: Spatial selection, ethnic concentration and neighbourhood impacts. Amsterdam: Ios Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drever, A. I. (2004). Separate spaces, separate outcomes? Neighbourhood impacts on minorities in Germany. Urban Studies, 41(8), 1423–1439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, R. E. (2007). Expanding homes and Increasing Inequalities; U.S. Housing Development and the Residential Segregation of the Affluent. Social Problems, 54(1), 23–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrkamp, P. (2005). Placing identities: Transnational practices and local attachments of Turkish immigrants in Germany. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(2), 345–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faist, T. (2000). The volume and dynamics of international migration and transnational social spaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Galster, G. C. (2005). Neighbourhood mix, social opportunities, and the policy challenges of an increasingly diverse Amsterdam. Amsterdam: Wibaut Lecture, Institute for Metropolitan and International Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gijsberts, M., & Dagevos, J. (2007a). The socio-cultural integration of ethnic minorities in the Netherlands: Identifying neighbourhoods effects on multiple integration outcomes. Housing Studies, 22(5), 805–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gijsberts, M., & Dagevos, J. (2007b). Interventies voor integratie. Het tegengaan van etnische concentratie en het bevorderen van interetnisch contact [Interventions for integration. Combating ethnic concentration and stimulating interethnic contact]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, B., & Cole, I. (2001). Social balance and mixed neighbourhoods in Britain since 1979: A review of discourse and practice in social housing. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 19(1), 103–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruner, S. (2010). ‘The others don’t want …’. Small-scale segregation: Hegemonic public discourses and racial boundaries in German neighbourhoods. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(2), 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havekes, E. A., & Uunk, W. (2008). Identificatie in context. Het effect van de etnische samenstelling van de buurt op de identificatie van allochtonen met Nederlanders [Identification in context. The effect of ethnic composition of the neighbourhood on the identification of ethnic minorities with native Dutch]. Mens en Maatschappij, 83(4), 376–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jókövi, M., Boon, C., & Filius, F. (2006). Woningproductie ten tijde van VINEX; een verkenning [Housing production during VINEX; an exploration]. Rotterdam/Den Haag: NAi/RPB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., & Murie, A. (2006). The right to buy: Analysis and evaluation of a housing policy. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kivisto, P. (2001). Theorizing transnational immigration: A critical review of current efforts. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24(4), 549–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokx, A., & van Kempen, R. (2010). A fact is a fact, but perception is reality: stakeholders’ perceptions and urban policies in the process of urban restructuring. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28, 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manley, D., & van Ham, M. (2011). Choice-based letting, ethnicity and segregation in England. Urban Studies, 48(14), 3125–3143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massey, D. (1994). Space, place, and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. (1997). Nota stedelijke vernieuwing [Memorandum on Urban Renewal]. The Hague: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. (2007). Actieplan Krachtwijken: van aandachtswijk naar krachtwijk [Action plan strong neighbourhoods: From attention neighbourhoods to strong neighbourhoods]. The Hague: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment. (2009). Integratiebrief [Integration Letter]. The Hague: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Interior Affairs. (2011a). Woonvisie [Vision on Housing]. The Hague: Ministry of Interior Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Interior Affairs. (2011b). Integratie, binding en burgerschap [Integration, binding and citizenship]. The Hague: Ministry of Interior Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice. (2005). Jaarnota integratiebeleid 2005 [Yearly memorandum on integration policy]. The Hague: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Municipality of Rotterdam. (2003). Rotterdam zet door: op weg naar een stad in balans [Rotterdam presses on: on the way to a city in balance]. Rotterdam: Gemeente Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouwehand, A.L., Van der Laan Bouma-Doff, W. (2007). Excluding disadvantaged households into Rotterdam neighbourhoods; equitable, efficient or revanchist? Paper for the ENHR conference on Sustainable Urban Areas, Rotterdam, 25–28 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. (2006). Parallel lives? Challenging discourses of British Muslim self-segregation. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24(1), 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. E., & Landolt, P. (1999). The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promise of an emergent research field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 217–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posthumus, H., Bolt, G., & Van Kempen, R. (2013). Urban restructuring, displaced households and neighbourhood change: Results from three Dutch cities. In M. Van Ham, D. Manley, N. Bailey, L. Simpson, & D. Maclennan (Eds.), Understanding neighbourhood dynamics. New insights for neighbourhood effects research (pp. 87–109). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priemus, H., & Gruis, V. (2011). Social housing and illegal state aid: The agreement between European commission and Dutch government. International Journal of Housing Policy., 11(1), 89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RLI. (2011). Open doors, closed doors: median-income groups and the housing market. The Hague: The Councils for the Environment and Infrastructure (RLI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. (2005). The search for community cohesion: Key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy agenda. Urban Studies, 42(8), 1411–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Beckhoven, E., & Van Kempen, R. (2003). Social effects of urban restructuring: a case study in Amsterdam and Utrecht, the Netherlands. Housing Studies, 18(6), 853–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Daalen, G., & van der Land, M. (2008). Next steps in choice-based letting in the Dutch social housing sector. International Journal of Housing Policy, 8(3), 317–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Laan Bouma-Doff, W. (2007). Confined contact: Residential segregation and ethnic bridges in the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 44(5/6), 997–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Laan Bouma-Doff, W. (2008). Concentrating on participation: Ethnic Concentration and Labour Market Participation of Four Ethnic Groups. Schmollers Jahrbuch/Journal of Applied Social Science Studies, 128(1), 153–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Eijk, G. (2010a). Unequal networks: Spatial segregation, relationships and inequality in the city. Amsterdam: Ios Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eijk, G. (2010b). Exclusionary policies are not just about the ‘neoliberal city’: A critique of theorie of urban revanchism and the case of Rotterdam. International Journal if Urban and Regional Research, 34(4), 820–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ham, M., van Kempen, R., & van Weesep, J. (2006). The changing role of the Dutch social rented sector. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 21(3), 315–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ham, M., Manley, D., Bailey, N., Simpson, L., & Maclennan, D. (2012). Introduction. In M. van Ham, D. Manley, N. Bailey, L. Simpson, & D. Maclennan (Eds.), Neighbourhood effects research: New perspectives (pp. 1–22). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ham, M., Manley, D., Bailey, N., Simpson, L., & Maclennan, D. (2013). Understanding neighbourhood dynamics: new insights for neighbourhood effects research. In M. van Ham, D. Manley, N. Bailey, L. Simpson, & D. Maclennan (Eds.), Understanding neighbourhood dynamics: new insights for neighbourhood effects research (pp. 1–22). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Kempen, R., & Bolt, G. (2009). Social cohesion, social mix, and urban policies in the Netherlands. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 24(4), 457–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass and public policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittebrood, K., & Permentier, M. (2011). Wonen, wijken and interventies. Krachwijkenbeleid in perspectief [Housing, neighbourhood and interventions. The ‘empowered neighbourhoods’ policy in perspective]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, R., & Jargowsky, P. A. (2006). Suburban development and economic segregation in the 1990s. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28(3), 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelinsky, W., & Lee, B. A. (1998). Heterolocalism: An alternative model of the socialspatial behaviour of immigrant ethnic communities. International Journal of Population Geography, 4(4), 281–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, 80.115, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Gideon Bolt & Ronald van Kempen

Authors
  1. Gideon Bolt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald van Kempen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gideon Bolt .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Road, Clifton, Bristol, BS8 1SS, United Kingdom

    David Manley

  2. , OTB Research Inst for the Built Environm, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 9, Delft, 2628 BX, Netherlands

    Maarten van Ham

  3. , Urban Studies, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RS, United Kingdom

    Nick Bailey

  4. , The Cathie Marsh Centre for Census and S, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom

    Ludi Simpson

  5. , Centre for Housing Research, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, KY16 9AL, Fife, United Kingdom

    Duncan Maclennan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science and Business Dordrecht.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bolt, G., van Kempen, R. (2013). Neighbourhood Based Policies in the Netherlands: Counteracting Neighbourhood Effects?. In: Manley, D., van Ham, M., Bailey, N., Simpson, L., Maclennan, D. (eds) Neighbourhood Effects or Neighbourhood Based Problems?. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6695-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation