Young Families in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area

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