YOUNG FAMILIES IN THE AMSTERDAM METROPOLITAN AREA POLICY BRIEF
1
Cover image: Rijnboutt.nl (2017) 2
YOUNG FAMILIES IN THE AMSTERDAM METROPOLITAN AREA POLICY BRIEF
Luuk Buitendijk
6045030
Mark Gort
5558794
Koen Klouwen
4139445
Daan Vis
4103807 3
SUMMARY Although cities in the Netherlands witness an
This policy brief examines how the municipalities
increasing population, a trend became visible of
in the Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam (MRA)
young family households moving out of the city
can cope with this trend. This in order to help the
to other municipalities (CBS, 2016a). Besides
reader understand how to adapt to contemporary
Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht, it is especially
interurban migration trends. While having in mind
Amsterdam that is undergoing these changes.
theories about life course, types of orientation
While the population of Amsterdam is growing
of capital and borrowed size the housing policies
with an average of ten thousand people per year,
of the concerned municipalities of Amsterdam,
the last two years this growth was mostly due to
Amstelveen, Almere, Haarlem, Zaanstad and
international migration. Amsterdam is witnessing,
Haarlemmermeer are analysed. The housing policy
more than any other Dutch city, an increasing
of the MRA is analysed as well.
amount of young family households leaving the city (CBS, 2017a). The young family households leaving
Analysing these policies gives an insight to what
Amsterdam especially move to Amstelveen, Almere,
extent the mentioned municipalities are aware of
Haarlem, Zaanstad or Haarlemmermeer and can in
the trend and, subsequently, how they respond
this regard be called ‘receiving’ municipalities (CBS,
to it. This analysis has led to several issues that
2017c).
stand out and leads to some recommendations. Firstly, the municipalities should share a single unified view regarding the trend. Secondly, the discussed municipalities do not yet adjust their policies enough to each other. Thirdly, to optimize the organization of the regional housing market of the MRA, each municipality needs to be better
4
Summary
aware of the demands of the specific households they attract and organize their housing market accordingly. For these issues counts that when this is not accomplished, interventions implemented are in danger of being in conflict with trends. This could eventually lead to non-matching housing and vacant newly built dwellings. The municipalities should be better aware of the closely intertwined housing market and act according to it in order to not compete but complement each other. Lastly, the concerned municipalities should use or improve the potential of borrowed size which in practice should mainly be done by further improving the transport opportunities within the MRA.
Summary
Image: Jaap.nl (2017) 5
6
INTRODUCTION
8
1 TREND
11
2 POLICIES
21
3 RECOMMENDATIONS
33
CONCLUSION
40
REFERENCES
42
Image: Arcam.nl (2016)
7
INTRODUCTION Although cities in the Netherlands witness an
As a result of the growing population of Amsterdam
increasing population (Centraal Bureau voor de
the demand for housing is ever rising. This has
Statistiek [CBS], 2016a) a trend became visible of
led to an increasing housing shortage, not only
young family households moving out of the city
in Amsterdam but also in other municipalities
to other municipalities. This trend is particularly
within the Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam (e.g.
present in the four biggest cities in the Netherlands:
Zaanstad, Almere, Haarlem, Haarlemmermeer).
Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, and Utrecht.
Besides, this development is reflected in the rising
(Moerkamp, 2015; CBS, 2016b & 2017a). Especially
house prices. In the nearby future the challenge
the city of Amsterdam is undergoing these changes.
of housing shortage will increase even further
While the population of Amsterdam is growing
(Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving [PBL], 2016).
with an average of ten thousand people per year
This extensive housing challenge asks for the
it also witnesses, more than any other Dutch city,
realization of more dwellings, whether this is newly
an increasing amount of young family households
build or a result of the transformation of vacant
leaving the city (CBS, 2017a).
(office) buildings or un(der)used land (PBL, 2017). The goal of this policy brief is to examine how the municipalities in the Metropolitan Region of Amsterdam (MRA) can cope with this trend and in order to help the reader understand how to adapt to contemporary interurban migration trends. When addressing the housing shortage challenge it is of importance that both the city of Amsterdam and surrounding municipalities within
8
Introduction
the MRA are aware of the type of housing that
The policy brief starts two analytic parts. One in
should be provided regarding the stage of migration
which the trend of families leaving Dutch cities
and residential mobility in different life-courses.
will be explained using insights from international
Depending on the life-course of people the type
academic literature on household mobility and the
of preferred housing differs. Municipalities should
life course. The second analytical part provides
take notice of the trend of young family households
an overview of the municipal housing policies in
moving out of the city. So that building for vacancy
the MRA, in which a distinction is made between
in both Amsterdam and surrounding municipalities
Amsterdam and the surrounding receiving areas.
within the MRA will be prevented.
The concluding section integrates the first two sections and provides the different municipalities
This policy brief is of relevance since it is important
within the MRA with policy advice based on findings
that people can live where they prefer to live. There
in scientific literature.
is a visible trend which hardly can be changed or denied which makes it relevant to respond to it by offering housing that is preferred by the young family households and to do so in the right places. When disregarding residential mobility and the current trends the risk is that residents move elsewhere. By creating suitable housing in surrounding municipalities for the young family households that want to leave Amsterdam these people more likely will stay within the MRA.
Introduction
9
10
1 TREND In 2016, the CBS (2016a) predicted that Dutch cities will keep growing until at least 2030. The four largest cities in the Netherlands will grow with about 15 percent in the period between 2015 and 2030. However, in the western part of the country, there are also smaller fast growing municipalities like Almere, Haarlem, Haarlemmermeer and Amersfoort. The first three of these four municipalities are part of the MRA. Amsterdam itself has been growing
1.1
YOUNG FAMILIES MOVING OUT 12
with an average 11,000 people for the last five
1.2
THE INFLUENCE OF CAPITAL
15
years. Half of the population growth was due
1.3
PULL FACTORS
17
1.4
BORROWED SIZE
18
to a natural increase, the other half was due to migration. However, for the last two years this was only due to international migration. In Amsterdam, the domestic migration numbers are negative (CBS, 2017b). This means that more Dutch people are leaving the capital than there are moving in.
Image: Stuffdutchpeoplelike.com (2016)
11
1.1
Young families moving out
One specific group especially stands out in this
book, Rossi described how families went through
trend: young families. According to the CBS (2017a),
consecutive phases of their family life cycle (e.g.
40 percent of the young families in Amsterdam left
marriage, having children or widowhood) and
the city before their first child reached the age of
showed different residential needs in each cycle.
four - often to nearby municipalities. This number
These changes in needs translated to desires for
is the highest in Amsterdam, but the trend is also
moving (Golledge & Stimson, 1997). However,
visible in the other big cities in the Netherlands:
this theory has been criticised over the years.
Utrecht (34%), Rotterdam (28%) and The Hague
Rossi’s approach is quite deterministic concerning
(27%).
household mobility. In his theory, mobility is solely based on developments in family structure. Other
This trend can probably be explained by the fact
factors like education and work are not taken into
that getting a first child is often assumed to be an
account. Also, recent cultural change in family
important trigger for moving because. As Lee et
structures make the theory less applicable (e.g.
al. argue: “when the household enters the child-
having children at later age, having children outside
bearing and child-rearing stages of the life course,
marriage, increasing number of single-person
both the current neighbourhood and the current
households) (Gillespie, 2016).
housing unit may be judged on new standards” (in Rabe & Taylor, 2010, p. 532).
As a response to these criticisms, the life course framework was developed (see figure 1.1). Contrary
Life course
to the life cycle framework, this framework makes a
The basis of this assumption can be found in the
distinction between four ‘careers’: education, labour
life cycle theory. This theory was first proposed by
market, household, and housing. These careers
Rossi in his book Why families move in 1955. In his
exist parallel to each other and do not follow a
12
1 Trend
specified cycle, as was the case in Rossi’s model. A
income, savings and career prospects, whereas
development in one of these careers may function
examples of restrictions are homeownership and
as a trigger to move (Mulder & Hooimeijer, 1999).
other people in the household. Enablers and
For example, when a person finds a new job, he or
limitations on the macro level are referred to as
she may want to live closer to that job: a motive for
opportunities and constraints. The most important
moving.
enabler here is that housing opportunities must exist: these opportunities also need to suit
However, the existence of a motive for moving does
the qualitative demands of the households.
mean that relocation behaviour will actually take
Furthermore, financing must be available.
place. This depends on enablers and limitations on
Constraints include a lack of available housing, a
a micro and macro scale: created by the individual
lack of financing opportunities and obstacles like
or external factors. On the micro level, these are
allocation rules - for instance concerning social
called resources and restrictions. Resources include
housing (Mulder & Hooimeijer, 1999).
Figure 1.1 The life course diagram (adapted from Mulder & Hooijmeijer, 1999). 1 Trend
13
Having children
urban areas to rural areas. This is likely because
As Mulder and Hooimeijer (1999) mention, it is
of the increased need for space and a suitable
important that housing opportunities need to fit the
environment for bringing up children (Kulu, 2008;
qualitative demands of households. Young families
Rabe & Taylor, 2010). However, the probability of
often have a similar demand for a new place to
moving decreases as family size increases, mainly
live. Based on research in Germany, Kley (2011)
due to increasing costs of moving. This is especially
argues that childbirth can provide couples with
true for moves towards urban areas (Kulu, 2008).
the opportunity to fulfill a long-lasting desire of
Recently there has also been evidence of an
moving to a child-friendly environment. Kulu (2008)
opposing trend, showing that an increasing amount
similarly argues childbirth is a chance for parents
of families are staying in the inner city (Boterman,
to fulfill their dream of the ‘rural idyll’. Generally,
Karsten & Musterd, 2010; Lilius, 2014). Based
other research has been supportive of the positive
on research in Helsinki, Lilius (2014) states that
relation between childbirth and migration (e.g.
these families favour the urban lifestyle and see
Rabe & Taylor, 2010). Nevertheless, it is important
it as compatible with having children. She argues
to note that some contrasting evidence still exists
planners should acknowledge and facilitate these
(Kley, 2011).
new lifestyles.
So, Kley (2011) and Kulu (2008) both argue that
This suggests that there are more factors besides
young families prefer a more child-friendly and
having children and the life course that influence
rural environment. A literature review by Kulu
moving behaviour. A frequently used explanation for
(2008) concerning these statements shows that
household movements is the concept of different
childbearing is an important trigger for moving.
kinds of capital. This concept is elaborated in the
These moves mostly consist of moves from
next paragraph.
14
1 Trend
1.2
The influence of capital
Within the category of young families that got
and 13%. The cities of Rotterdam, Den Haag and
their first child, especially the families with a high
Utrecht show a similar development, however, the
income moved away from the big cities (see figure
percentages are somewhat lower (CBS, 2017a).
1.2). This phenomenon is true for the Netherlands
The families moving away mostly move to nearby
as a whole but especially occurs in the four biggest
municipalities. In the case of Amsterdam, many
cities. For instance, the percentage of young families
move to the municipality of Haarlem. In its housing
that moved away from Amsterdam is 51% for the
vision, the municipality of Haarlem (Gemeente
highest income group and just 30% for the lowest
Haarlem, 2017) also identifies this trend and notes
income group. For the municipalities outside the
that it is mostly attracting highly educated families
big four, these percentages are respectively 19%
with an above-average income.
Figure 1.2 Families that got their first child in 2012 and moved to a different municipality before 2016 (CBS, 2017a).
1 Trend
15
A study by Boterman (2012) provides an
â‚Ź90,000. Using these definitions, Boterman (2012)
explanation for this development. The study looked
defines four groups of young families, depicted
at residential patterns of people becoming first-
in figure 1.3. His research shows that it is mostly
time parents in the Amsterdam area to identify the
people with a lot of cultural capital that tend to stay
effects of different forms of capital; specifically,
in inner cities after their first child is born. These are
cultural and economic capital. Boterman (2012)
the people that attach a lot of value to the urban
defines cultural capital by giving points for certain
lifestyle and corresponding values. Households with
characteristics of households. For instance points
a lot of economic capital and relatively little cultural
are given for university degrees, jobs in the
capital, on the other hand, attach more value to
knowledge or creative sector and frequent visits
their housing situation and are more likely to leave
to cultural facilities. The more points, the higher
the city after their first child is born. Households
the cultural capital of a household. High economic
that score high on both scales tend to stay in the
capital is defined as an income between â‚Ź90,000
city (Boterman, 2012).
and â‚Ź200,000. Low economic capital is below
Figure 1.3 Types of orientation of capital (adapted from Boterman, 2012). 16
1 Trend
1.3
Pull factors
These findings explain the trend of families moving
As introduced above, suburban and rural
out of the city but at the same time confirms the
environments attract young families because
conclusion made by Lilius (2014) who identifies a
of their spacious character (Kulu, 2008; Rabe &
portion of middle-class families that prefers living
Taylor, 2010). However, there are more reasons
in the city center, even after the birth of their first
for households to move to suburban and rural
child. The next section will illustrate how these
areas. On the other hand, the city also attracts
types of capital can be identified in the pull factors
people for various reasons. Table 1.1 provides
of both urban and suburban/rural areas.
an overview of the advantages often associated
Table 1.1 Pull factors of urban and suburban/rural environments. Urban environments • Proximity to work, reduced commuting times (Boterman et al., 2010; Karsten, 2007)
• Proximity to a broad range of facilities (Karsten, 2007; Lilius, 2014)
• Opportunities for cultural consumption (Boterman et al., 2010)
• Urban lifestyle: focused on (dual) career and consumption (Boterman et al., 2010; Karsten, 2007)
• Urban values: density, diversity, anonymity, tolerance, distinction (Boterman et al., 2010; Karsten, 2007; Lilius, 2014)
Suburban/rural environments • Spacious dwellings on private grounds (Boterman, 2012; Boterman et al. 2010; Kley, 2011; Kulu, 2008)
• Lots of green and space (Boterman et al., 2010)
• Child-friendly environment (Kley, 2011; Kulu, 2008)
• Homogenous population (Boterman, 2012; Boterman et al., 2010)
• Environment free from urban problems and dangers (Boterman et al., 2010)
• Increased social safety (Boterman, 2012)
• Rural idyll/dream (Kulu, 2008)
1 Trend
17
1.4
Borrowed size
with both environments. Naturally, what may be
According to Burger et al., Alonso first introduced
considered an advantage for someone preferring a
the concept of borrowed size (2015). He stated that
rural environment may be seen as a disadvantage by
“in certain European urban patterns, such as those
propagators of an urban environment.
of Germany and the Low Countries, whose cities, quite small by our standards, apparently achieve
Keeping the distinctions between the different
sufficient scale for the functioning of a modern
groups of young families (figure 1.3) (Boterman,
economy by borrowing size from one another. This
2012) in mind, this table shows a clear distinction
phenomenon transforms the issue of the size and
between the pull factors of urban environments
growth of a city by redefining it to include, in some
and suburban or rural areas. The city mostly attracts
degree, its neighbours. (Alonso, 1973, p. 200)”
people by offering a certain lifestyle, whereas
(Burger et al., 2015, p. 1092). By complementing
suburban and rural environments offer a solution for
each other cities function as an urban network,
the practical problems of cities such as high housing
which enables them to profit from each other’s
prices and lack of space, leading to a difference in
facilities. Burger et al. (2015) argue that this
people moving to these environments.
borrowed size concept promises to explain a large part of the urbanisation patterns in the Western
The division between these two types of regions
world.
does not mean that urban areas and suburban and rural regions are totally separated from each other:
This is underpinned by Mulder & Hooimeijer (1999),
they can actually complement each other. This
who argue that triggers in the housing and family
interaction has been described as ‘borrowed size’
careers mostly result in short-distance relocations
(Burger, Meijers, Hoogerbrugge & Tresserra, 2015).
(residential mobility), as triggers in these careers can usually be dealt with without an adaptation
18
1 Trend
of the daily activity space. Such breaking up of daily activity spaces is prevented whenever possible as this can involve high economic as well as psychological costs (Kulu, 2008). Triggers in education and labor market career (e.g. a new job), on the other hand, are more likely to result in longdistance relocations (migration) and thus involve a change in daily activity spaces. This means that young families - who saw a change in their family careers - are more likely to move to a place nearby. In the case of the MRA, this leads to the assumption that young families leaving Amsterdam would prefer to stay in the metropolitan area. Therefore, it is of importance to see what to what extent Amsterdam and its surrounding municipalities actually could provide housing for these households.
1 Trend
19
20
2 POLICIES Changes in the household composition rather leads to short-distance movements, instead of long-distance movements (Mulder & Hooijmeijer, 1999). Therefore, it is important to provide housing possibilities for young families leaving Amsterdam in surrounding municipalities. In order to see whether this trend is taken into account in future policies, different housing policies will be analysed. However, before these policies will be addressed, a short overview of the other relevant stakeholders will be given. Although all these stakeholders are of relevance, the municipalities make the most policies
2.1
AMSTERDAM
24
2.2
THE MRA
26
2.3
‘RECEIVING’ MUNICIPALITIES
28
concerning housing. Therefore, only municipal policy documents from six large municipalities will be taken into account - along with the MRA housing policy document. The first municipality is Amsterdam. Then, based on their important role as destination for young families from Amsterdam: Amstelveen, Almere, Haarlem, Zaanstad and Haarlemmermeer.
1 TrendT. Best (2015) Image:
21
Stakeholders Within the MRA 2 provinces, 33 municipalities
There are also many private actors involved
and the Vervoerregio Amsterdam (transport region
in the housing market. The main actors in the
Amsterdam) work together to improve the region
market for residential space are households; they
(Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2017). However, there
determine the demand for housing based on their
are more stakeholders influencing the housing
characteristics. In the case of the financing and
situation in the region - both public and private
investment market, the main actors are institutional
organisations.
investors (e.g. pension funds and insurers), private investors and banks. These actors invest in housing
Other (semi-) public organisations than the ones
and, in the case of banks, provide financing for
mentioned above are the different subregions
potential homeowners. The most important actors
that are situated in the MRA: for example IJmond,
in the development/building market are landowners,
Zaanstreek-Waterland and Zuid-Kennemerland.
developers, builders, and housing corporations (PBL,
Also, the Dutch national government has
2013; Geltner, Miller, Clayton & Eichholtz, 2014).
an influence on spatial developments in the
The last group consists of hybrid organisations,
metropolitan area. It influences the housing market
since housing corporations are private organisations
through various tax arrangements (e.g. mortgage
with public responsibilities. Figure 2.1 shows an
interest deduction). In the case of rental housing,
overview of the most important actors influencing
the government mainly exerts influence through
housing developments in the MRA.
its policy concerning (the positioning of) housing corporations and rental regulation (PBL, 2013).
22
2 Policies
Figure 2.1 Overview of actors in the Amsterdam metropolitan area. 2 Policies
23
2.1 Amsterdam The largest municipality in the Amsterdam
dwellings and a suburban living environment,
metropolitan area is Amsterdam, with a population
but still more families entered the city than left
840,000 in 2016 (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).
(Gemeente Amsterdam, 2011).
During the last decade the growth in the number of inhabitants was larger than ever. The municipality
Problems on the housing market
expects this growth to maintain. It expects that
It is thus more in most recent policy documents that
in 2025 Amsterdam will be home to 900,000
the trend of families leaving the city is recognised.
inhabitants (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).
However, what seems to be more in the centre of attention for the municipality of Amsterdam
Approximately a quarter (27%) of the total
is the growing number and housing of youth,
population in Amsterdam in 2025 will be formed by
students, elderly and vulnerable groups (Gemeente
families with children (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).
Amsterdam, 2016; Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).
The municipality of Amsterdam recognises the
In the coming years, the population of Amsterdam
trend that young families leave the city. Partly due
will grow with 10,000-12,000 inhabitants per year
to this development, the population of Amsterdam
- mainly due to students and youngsters coming to
will further age leading to an increasing share of
the city. Additionally, most current inhabitants will
people over 55 years old. However, this trend was
stay, causing a mentionable increase in the number
not yet visible in former policy documents. In the
of people with the age of 55 or above (Gemeente
Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040, written in 2011, it
Amsterdam, 2016; Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017).
was stated that the share of families on the total
The municipality expects that the share of families
population had increased in the preceding 15 years
will decrease. But since the total population of
(Gemeente Amsterdam, 2011). It did acknowledge
Amsterdam will grow in the coming decade, a
that, traditionally, families leave the city for larger
decrease in the share of families does not mean
24
2 Policies
that the absolute number of families in Amsterdam
Another issue that the municipality deals with is
decreases. Therefore, the municipality of
the ageing population and the policy for current
Amsterdam states that there is a concrete demand
older generations to live independently as long as
for family housing. This demand is in suburban
possible. Since the caring and housing sector are
living environments, with spacious houses in quiet
separated, people have to live in their own houses
settings, but with proper transportation networks
as long as they possibly can. Therefore, older
with the lively inner city (Gemeente Amsterdam,
generations move at a later stage in life, causing the
2016).
flow through to hamper as they occupy single-family housing which are more suitable for (young) families
When looking at some of the issues the municipality
(Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). It might be that
of Amsterdam addresses, possible reasons why
for such reasons young families are unable to find
families leave the city to live in adjacent, regional
proper housing. These issues have consequences
surroundings appear. One issue the municipality
for the entire housing market, including young
mentions is that the supply of large dwellings in
families.
social housing were not predominantly assigned to young families during the last couple of years (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). Rather these houses were, for a significant part, assigned to couples and singles. Therefore, finding a dwelling in social housing for families was a difficult task, forcing them to look beyond the city’s boundaries to find matching housing in other municipalities (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016; Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). 2 Policies
25
2.2
The MRA
The Amsterdam Metropolitan Area (figure 2.2) has
green spaces are never far away from the city
a population of 2.4 million inhabitants, occupying a
centres, contributing to a healthy and attractive
total of 1.1 million houses.
habitat (Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2016).
The MRA states that the housing stock has to
The main issues pointed out for the Amsterdam
increase with 250,000 new dwellings before
metropolitan area are the ageing population,
2040. This increase is primarily focused on
attraction of youngsters to the city and housing
urban environments and accessible locations
singles (Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2016;
(Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2016). The demand
Provincie Noord-Holland, 2017). Such demographic
for housing is high in the MRA, causing the housing
developments result in changing needs for the
prices to rise. However, this does not apply to the
housing stock. The population projection of
entire metropolitan region. Especially Amsterdam
the province of Noord-Holland for the period
and Haarlem are popular locations, whilst the
of 2017-2040 mentions the trend of families
newtowns Almere, Lelystad and Purmerend do not
leaving Amsterdam to live in more suburban areas
yet profit enough (Metropoolregio Amsterdam,
(Provincie Noord-Holland, 2017). However, also
2016). Despite these local differences, the
according to the province, there are indications
Amsterdam Metropolitan Area is seen as an
that families decide to stay in the city for a longer
interdependent urban system with one housing
period of time. This is in contrast with the trend
market, labour market, metropolitan landscape
described in the trend analysis and mentioned by
and transport system (Metropoolregio Amsterdam,
the municipality of Amsterdam. Contrasting views
2016). By connecting the urban areas properly, a
are also posed by the Amsterdam Metropolitan
wide variety of living environments can be offered
Area as they mention that families with young
on short travel distances. According to the MRA,
children more regularly decide to stay living in the
26
2 Policies
Figure 2.2 The Amsterdam metropolitan area (MRA). 2 Policies
27
2.3
‘Receiving’ municipaliti es
city (Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2016). It seems
Young families leaving the Dutch capital results in
that the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the
municipalities surrounding Amsterdam receiving
municipality of Amsterdam lack a unified view
more young family households. In this section
regarding families and their moving behaviour on
the housing policies of municipalities that attract
the housing market.
the most young family households are analysed. The young family households especially move to Amstelveen, Almere, Haarlem, Zaanstad and Haarlemmermeer (CBS, 2017c; see also figure 2.3). Analysing these policies will give an insight to what extent the mentioned municipalities are aware of the trend and, subsequently, how they respond to it. Amstelveen The municipality of Amstelveen is aware of the fact that their housing market is closely intertwined with the one of Amsterdam. Mainly young people, students, move to Amsterdam and mainly young family households move to Amstelveen making the total amount of relocations both ways comparable. Next to the relatively high percentage of elderly people and the attractiveness of Amstelveen
Figure 2.3 Destination of families with children moved out of Amsterdam in 2015 (CBS, 2016b). 28
for expats, the housing policy of Amstelveen is focussing on the realisation of student housing 2 Policies
and living environments for families and young-
program plays an important role. According to the
professionals. Because of the safe and quiet
municipality of Almere, a varied housing stock and
appearance Amstelveen has some important pull
living environments and an increased focus on
factors. Considering the region, Amstelveen has
culinary, culturally and museale venues in a compact
the biggest share of expensive owner-occupied
urban environment should be a response on this
homes. The specific role, shaped by the mentioned
aim. The realisation of 60,000 dwellings, in which
characteristics, makes that they place emphasis on
the dynamics in the current stock could also be
attracting middle and high income groups in their
utilized, could be an important contribution to this
housing agenda (Gemeente Amstelveen, 2016).
(Gemeente Almere, 2009).
Almere
Haarlem
Almere stimulates diversity as the core objective
Complementary to Almere, Haarlem states it want
to achieve the ambition of growing out into
to be a ‘complete’ city. Regardless of income,
a ‘complete’ city. In the present situation the
education, age, culture or household size Haarlem
city is not diverse in a sense that there is a
should offer the possibility of living in the city. To
overrepresentation of the middle class including
achieve this, the focus will be on house hunters
the facilities and type of housing that belong to this
with an emphasis on the ones that need support
population group. To make the scale jump and the
or seem to be supplanted. Until 2025 an extra
aim of being a complete and diverse city, Almere
7,500 dwellings are planned to be realized of which
is focussing on specific groups. The city wants
1,900 will be social rent. One of the trends of
to attract students, higher educated people and
which Haarlem aware concerns the increasing one-
pensioners, while at the same time keeping starters.
person-households. As an answer a considerable
In the endeavour of achieving this goal, the housing
amount of new dwellings will exist of small housing.
2 Policies
29
Since september 2016 Haarlem is part of the
Zaanstad
housing market region of the MRA. This means all
The municipality of Zaanstad emphasises the
municipalities part of the MRA make agreements
importance of research on housing needs to get a
on the programming and coordination of housing,
view on the housing demand. Regional research,
share knowledge and do joint research. Haarlem
such as Wonen in de Amsterdamse Regio (WIRA),
states that with this agreement, the municipalities
provided by the MRA is used for this purpose. As
strengthen each other and the region and are
stated in the vision of Haarlem, Zaanstad is one of
better capable of responding to new developments.
the municipalities where young family households
Another trend, known by Haarlem, is the moving
from Amsterdam - mostly with a yearly income
flow of highly educated young people and family
below €34,000 - move to. However in their own
households. Haarlem is aware of the move of young
vision, Zaanstad does not mention that it is aware
family households towards the city. It confirms
of this increasing trend. Meanwhile, Zaanstad
that most of these households leave Amsterdam
is expecting a grow in amount of households in
and settle in Haarlem. However, municipalities as
general which requires the realization of 600 new
Zaanstad, Purmerend or Amstelveen can be called
dwellings a year. It mentions the importance of a
‘receiving’ municipalities as well, regarding this type
balanced regional housing market and the moving
of household. Nonetheless, especially the higher
patterns of households in general between Zaanstad
educated households with an above average yearly
and Amsterdam, but does not explicitly reflect
income move to Haarlem. This is in contrast to
on what this balance means for its own housing
Zaanstad, where these type of households with a
stock and what kind of households are important
yearly income below €34,000 move (Gemeente
for Zaanstad in their relation with Amsterdam
Haarlem, 2017).
(Gemeente Zaanstad, n.d.).
30
2 Policies
Haarlemmermeer
the housing market (Gemeente Haarlemmermeer,
According to Haarlemmermeer, the demand side is
2012).
more than before leading concerning the housing market. Since the municipality is part of the MRA, housing is coordinated on a regional level which results in binding urbanisation agreements. Students tend to move out of Haarlemmermeer to (for example) Amsterdam. In a next life phase, when starting a family, these people want to flow through to a single-family home in one of the regional municipalities such as Haarlemmermeer. In this process this particular group stays within the region and contributes to the preservation of facilities and protects against dejuvenation and shrinkage. Haarlemmermeer is aware of this process and knows that the housing market of the municipalities are dependent on each other. Concerning housing, every municipality has a certain role and profile and, according to Haarlemmermeer, each profile offers different chances to attract specific people. To prevent a mismatch between demand and supply in municipalities Haarlemmermeer sees the importance of regional coordination of the development on 2 Policies
31
32
3 RECOMMENDATIONS After analysing the trend of young families leaving Amsterdam and explaining the underlying causes and explanations in chapter 1, chapter 2 showed related policy documents of different municipalities in the Amsterdam metropolitan area, and the MRA itself. These two analytical chapters form the basis of four recommendations: work towards a unified view on the trend; better align policies of different municipalities; align the needs of families and the
3.1
A UNIFIED VIEW
34
MRA and use the potential of borrowed size. These
3.2
ALIGNMENT OF POLICIES
35
four recommendations will be elaborated in the next
3.3
FAMILIES AND NEEDS
37
2.3
BORROWED SIZE
38
chapter.
Image: E. Bouw (2017)
33
3.1
A unified view
The first issue that stood out is that, within the
In order to avoid developing and implementing
municipality of Amsterdam, there seems to be
interventions which do not work properly, the
a lack of coherence regarding the perspective
municipality of Amsterdam and the Amsterdam
on moving behaviour of (young) families. In
Metropolitan Area must share a single unified view
the latest documents of the municipality, the
regarding the trend. At this moment there seems to
trend of young families leaving the city has
be a misunderstanding on whether or not families
been recognised (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016;
leave the city. Whereas in the Structuurvisie
Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017). However, in the
Amsterdam 2040 the trend has not been
Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040 this trend was
acknowledge, it is recognised in the latest housing
not yet acknowledged. It even mentioned that
documents of the municipality of Amsterdam.
families, to an increasing extent, want to live in
Working towards a future of Amsterdam as
the city (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2011). A same
proposed in the Structuurvisie might therefore be
kind of statement has been made in MRA policy,
brash as that future is partly based on demographic
where it was mentioned that families like to stay
trends that are not existent anymore.
in the city (Metropoolregio Amsterdam, 2017). Such statements are contradictory to the recent
This also counts for views presented by the
trend and there seems to be a lack of coherence
Amsterdam Metropolitan Area, which are partly
regarding the issue in the region, but also within
based on the city attracting families instead of
the municipality of Amsterdam itself. There is
these families wanting to leave. The task for the
no clear image of moving behaviour of (young)
MRA and the municipalities within the region is to
families on the municipal and regional scale. No
share a common view on the housing behaviour of
decent adjusting of policies and visions can lead to
(young) families between the different organisations,
incompatible interventions.
but also within the organisations. When this is not
34
3 Recommendations
3.2
Alignment of policies
accomplished, interventions implemented by the
The discussed municipalities do not yet adjust their
municipality are in danger of being in conflict with
policies enough to each other. Despite the notion
demographic trends, which can eventually lead
that regional coordination between municipalities
to non matching housing and vacant newly built
within the MRA is important, it is still deficient
dwellings.
when analysing the housing policies. Besides, and also part of the regional coherence, not all the municipalities seem to address the trend of young family households moving from Amsterdam to surrounding municipalities in their housing policies (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2016 & 2017; Gemeente Amstelveen, 2016; Gemeente Almere, 2009; Gemeente Haarlem, 2017; Gemeente Zaanstad, n.d.; Gemeente Haarlemmermeer, 2012). In short, although municipalities confirm on the importance of regional coherent housing policy, not all trends, views and implications are adjusted to this. A unified perception is thus not yet achieved on various policy levels. Although it differs between municipalities to a certain extent, the municipalities of Amstelveen, Haarlem and Haarlemmermeer do recognise the movement of young families from the city of
3 Recommendations
35
Amsterdam towards their municipalities and adapt
Zaanstad are important. They do not mention that
their housing policy to this (Gemeente Amstelveen,
they are aware of the described trend or how these
2016; Gemeente Haarlem, 2017; Gemeente
patterns and balanced market is interpreted.
Haarlemmermeer, 2012). On the other hand, when analysing the housing policy of Almere, there is
According to these implications the municipalities
not a major focus on young families. Neither the
could learn from the way Amstelveen, Haarlem and
trend nor the importance of regional coherence
Haarlemmermeer seem to handle this, following the
regarding housing policy is cited. The municipality
policy documents on housing. These municipalities
strives to attract more students and partly therefore
recognize the trend, know their specific role in
develops more cultural utilities (Gemeente Almere,
the MRA and act according to this. Mentioning
2009). Since students mainly move to the city of
the implications of the housing policy of Almere
Amsterdam, it is questionable whether Almere
and Zaanstad, they should be better aware of the
will succeed in attracting students. Moreover the
closely intertwining housing market or if they are,
aim of developing more cultural utilities in Almere
act according to it. This in a way in which they do
also clashes with the cultural capital and economic
not compete each other but (could) complement to
capital debate which will be discussed in the next
Amsterdam and vice versa.
recommendation. The municipality of Zaanstad does state the importance of regional research to get an view of the housing demand (Gemeente Zaanstad, n.d.). However, the analysed housing policy remains rather opaque with stating that a balanced regional housing market and the moving patterns of households in general between Amsterdam and 36
3 Recommendations
3.3
Families and needs
As mentioned in the previous issues, there is a lack
street, as often seems to be the suggestion in policy
of agreement concerning the trend of young families
documents. In the understanding of the motivations
either leaving or staying in the city as well as a
of both of these groups, the concepts of cultural
lack of coordination of municipal policies regarding
and economic capital provide a useful framework.
this trend. These problems can be traced back to
As the literature shows, it is mainly families with
another issue; there is a lack of understanding of
high economic capital (and low cultural capital) that
the specific housing demands of different families.
tend to leave the city (Boterman, 2012). These
This includes both specific housing demands as well
families mainly value housing characteristics (e.g.
as demand for certain environmental characteristics
spacious dwellings, lots of private space) and feel
and amenities. To optimize the organization of
a rather limited connection to the urban lifestyle.
the regional housing market of the MRA, each
Families with high cultural capital, on the other
municipality needs to be aware of the demands of
hand tend to stay in the city since they attach a lot
the specific households they attract and organize
of value to the urban lifestyle and corresponding
their housing market accordingly. As mentioned
cultural aspects.
before, the alignment of the various municipal policies at the regional level is key.
In their housing policies, the municipalities in the MRA should acknowledge this dual trend. For
The literature review shows that, in general, two
Amsterdam this means they have to recognize
distinct groups can be identified: those who stay
and accept that some families will leave the city.
in the (inner) city after having their first child,
Instead Amsterdam should redirect its focus to
and those who move to suburban/rural areas (for
meeting the needs of the group of families that
instance, Boterman, 2012). Consequently, the
does intend to stay. This means investing in
residential behavior of families is not a one-way
affordable family housing in the (inner) city and
3 Recommendations
37
3.4
Borrowed size
maintaining and increasing the cultural aspects the
As the literature shows, families have various
city has to offer. For the surrounding municipalities
reasons to leave or remain in the city in terms of
this means focusing on the demands of families
housing. Families choosing to remain value the
with mostly economic capital. This translates into
facilities and lifestyle the city has to offer whereas
the provision of high-quality family housing and
leaving families prefer suburban/rural environments.
limited investment in cultural capital. In taking
However, most of the families that are leaving still
this approach, both the MRA and the families will
want to make use of the advantages the city has to
benefit. Municipalities of the MRA can facilitate
offer, for instance in terms of services, education,
the housing needs of families within the region and
or employment. Consequently, residential moves
thus maintain the economic competitiveness of the
for purposes of improving housing (environment)
greater metropolitan region. Similarly, the families
conditions often take place within the same larger
will benefit by finding suitable housing and being
area. Because of this, families can to a large extent
able to keep their lives in the same daily activity
enjoy advantages of both urban and suburban/rural
space.
environments. This is reflected in the concept of borrowed size; cities forming an urban network in which they complement each other by benefiting from each other’s facilities (Burger et al., 2015). In accordance with previous recommendations, it is advised here that municipalities in the MRA work with the trend instead of against it. In this case, that means making use of or improving the potential of borrowed size. In practice, this
38
3 Recommendations
should mainly be done by further improvement of transport opportunities within the MRA, and specifically between Amsterdam and its surrounding municipalities. The transport region Amsterdam (Vervoerregio Amsterdam) is a valuable initiative in this context. Further cooperation may be beneficial here; for instance by scaling up the initiative to include all MRA municipalities. Working with the trend like this is the best option for both the MRA as a whole and the individual municipalities. Supporting a limited outflow of families from Amsterdam responds to the families’ needs and provides the receiving municipalities with much desired residents. At the same time this opens up the tight Amsterdam housing market for new inflow. This is not disadvantageous for Amsterdam since it still captures a lot of the economic value of relocated families through the concept of borrowed size. For the MRA as a whole, the net result is clearly positive.
3 Recommendations
39
CONCLUSION Young families leaving the Dutch capital for
of all families within the region while strengthening
surrounding municipalities seems a logical trend to
the region as a whole. Based on scientific literature
occur. They move away from the big city to be able
and an overview of current municipal policies, this
to raise their children in a more spacious, child-
policy brief has developed some guiding principles
friendly environment (Boterman, 2012; Boterman
on how to deal with this trend in way that benefits
et al. 2010; Kley, 2011; Kulu, 2008). Because there
all. Specific recommendations are made for both
is a lack of these desired environments within the
Amsterdam and main receiving municipalities.
municipality of Amsterdam, 40% of the young families left the Dutch capital before their first
What should be accomplished within the MRA,
child turned four (CBS, 2017a). Many of these
is proper coherence regarding the trend. At this
families moved to surrounding municipalities like
moment, not all municipalities acknowledge that
Almere, Amstelveen, Haarlem, Haarlemmermeer
more young families leave the city for more spacious
and Zaanstad (CBS, 2016b). The leaving households
living environments. Especially when the Amsterdam
have less attachment to the city lifestyle than the
Metropolitan Area wants to make operable and
ones who stay, and are primarily looking for more
efficient interventions, a unified view regarding
space (Boterman, 2012). Therefore, trying to keep
the new moving trend is of importance. Therefore
these families in the compact city of Amsterdam,
not only the regional policy has to be adjusted,
will not likely succeed.
but also municipal policies have to cope with the trend. Competition is in this case not workable, but
The regional scale at which these developments
municipalities should rather focus on cooperation
take place show the need for regional coordination
through governance. Adapt to the needs of families,
of housing policies within the MRA. In doing so, the
of both the ones who stay in the city by enhancing
municipalities of the MRA can facilitate the needs
cultural amenities, and the families who leave the
40
Conclusion
city, by creating more spacious and child-friendly living conditions. Eventually the MRA can benefit from the borrowed-size effect when enough investments are done in (public) transport and infrastructure. Capital, people and satisfaction are kept within the borders of the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area. Thus, do not try to turn the trend around. Rather, through governance and borrowed-size effects, benefit as a whole.
Image: Inntel Hotels (2017)
41
REFERENCES Boterman, W.R., L. Karsten, L. & S. Musterd (2010). Gentrifiers Settling Down? Patterns and
verlaten-de-grote-stad. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2017b, 7
Trends of Residential Location of Middle-Class
November). Amsterdam groeit, vooral
Families in Amsterdam. Housing Studies 25(5),
door migratie. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/
693-714.
nieuws/2017/45/amsterdam-groeit-vooral-
Burger, M.J., E.J. Meijers, M.M. Hoogerbrugge & J.M. Tresserra (2015). Borrowed Size,
door-migratie. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2017c, 11
Agglomeration Shadows and Cultural
September). Tussen gemeente verhuisden
Amenities in North-West Europe. European
personen. http://statline.cbs.nl/Statweb/public
Planning Studies 23(6), 1090-1109.
ation/?DM=SLNL&PA=81734NED&D1=0&D
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2016a, 12
2=59%2c66%2c71-72%2c85%2c99%2c104-
September). PBL/CBS prognose: Groei
105%2c138%2c152%2c182%2c195-
steden zet door. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/
197%2c206-207%2c225%2c233%2c249%2c
nieuws/2016/37/pbl-cbs-prognose-groei-
252%2c260%2c331%2c337%2c345%2c411-
steden-zet-door.
412%2c424%2c442%2c444%2c456%
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2016b, 9 June). Meer jonge gezinnen verlaten de stad. https:// www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2016/23/meerjonge-gezinnen-verlaten-de-stad. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2017a, 7 November). Veel jonge gezinnen verlaten
42
2c463%2c466%2c468&D3=72&D4=45&HDR=G3%2cT%2cG1&STB=G2&VW=T Geltner, D.M., N.G. Miller, J. Clayton & P. Eichholtz (2014). Commercial Real Estate: Analysis and Investments. Mason (OH): OnCourse Learning. Gemeente Almere (2009). WoonVisie Almere 2.0.
de grote stad. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/
Wonen in Almere 2.0. Almere: Gemeente
nieuws/2017/45/veel-jonge-gezinnen-
Almere. References
Gemeente Amstelveen (2016). Woonagenda
Household Mobility in America: Patterns,
Amstelveen 2015-2018. Amstelveen:
Processes, and Outcomes. New York (NY):
Gemeente Amstelveen.
Springer Science + Business Media.
Gemeente Amsterdam (2011). Structuurvisie
Golledge, R.G. & R.J. Stimson (1997). Chapter 13:
Amsterdam 2040: economisch sterk
Residential mobility and location decisions. In
en duurzaam. Amsterdam: Gemeente
R.G. Golledge & R.J. Stimson, Spatial Behavior:
Amsterdam.
A Geographical Perspective. New York (NY):
Gemeente Amsterdam (2016). Koers 2025: ruimte voor de stad. Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam. Gemeente Amsterdam (2017). Woonagenda 2025.
Guilford Press. Karsten, L. (2007). Housing as a Way of Life: Towards an Understanding of Middle-Class Families’ Preference for an Urban Residential
Amsterdam: Gemeente Amsterdam.
Location. Housing Studies 22(1), 83-98.
Gemeente Haarlem (2017). Woonvisie Haarlem
Kley, S. (2011). Explaining the Stages of Migration
2017–2020: Doorbouwen aan een (t)huis.
within a Life-course Framework. European
Haarlem: Gemeente Haarlem.
Sociological Review 27(4), 469-486.
Gemeente Haarlemmermeer (2012). Structuurvisie
Kulu, H. (2008). Fertility and spatial mobility in
Haarlemmermeer 2030. Hoofddorp:
the life course: evidence from Austria.
Gemeente Haarlemmermeer.
Environment and Planning A 40, 632-652.
Gemeente Zaanstad (n.d.). Uitvoeringsagenda
Lilius, J. (2014). Is There Room for Families in the
Wonen 2015-2019. Zaandam: Gemeente
Inner City? Life-Stage Blenders Challenging
Zaanstad.
Planning. Housing Studies 29(6) 843-861.
Gillespie, B.J. (2016). Chapter 3: Characteristics of the Mobile Population. In B.J. Gillespie, References
Metropoolregio Amsterdam (2016). Ruimtelijkeconomische actie-agenda 2016-2020. 43
Amsterdam: Metropoolregio Amsterdam. Metropoolregio Amsterdam (2017, 13 December). Over de Metropoolregio Amsterdam. https://www.metropoolregioamsterdam.nl/ pagina/20161229-over-mra. Moerkamp, J. (2015, 25 September). Gezinnen
- Een overzicht van bevindingen uit studies van het PBL. The Hague: Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving. Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (2017). Transformatiepotentie: Woningbouwmogelijkheden in de bestaande
gaan nog steeds de stad uit. http://www.
stad. The Hague: Planbureau voor de
binnenlandsbestuur.nl/ruimte-en-milieu/
Leefomgeving.
nieuws/gezinnen-gaan-nog-steeds-de-staduit.9494204.lynkx. Mulder, C.H. & P. Hooimeijer (1999). Chapter 6: Residential Relocations in the Life Course. In L.J.G. van Wissen & P.A. Dykstra (eds.),
Provincie Noord-Holland (2017). Prognose 2017-2040: bevolking, huishoudens en woningbehoefte. Haarlem: Provincie NoordHolland. Rabe, B. & M. Taylor (2010). Residential mobility,
Population Issues: An Interdisciplinary Focus.
quality of neighbourhood and life course
New York (NY): Springer Science + Business
events. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A
Media.
173(3), 531-555.
Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (2016). De verdeelde triomf: Verkenning van stedelijk‑economische ongelijkheid en opties voor beleid. The Hague: Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving. Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving (2017). Woningprijzen: bepalende factoren en actoren 44
References
45
46