Volkshuisvesting in Europa & Europa in de volkshuisvesting Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Volkshuisvesting in Europa & Europa in de volkshuisvesting Dudok Wonen Management Cafe Hilversum, 18 Februari 2010 Gerard van Bortel, Onderzoeksinstituut OTB The Republic of Serbia is building a new social housing system in a country with many residents affected by war and poverty. This makes it very relevant to connect the Serbian housing system with other welfare activities and community building initiatives. This paper wants to contribute to the development of the Serbian housing system by presenting examples and experiences from England, The Netherlands, Belgium and Italy; and do so from an institutional and organisational perspective. The paper starts with a conceptual framework to position and compare different housing systems. We will continue with an exploration of recent institutional and organisational developments in the social housing models and the characteristics and activities of social housing providers. The paper ends with some recommendations for the design of the Serbian housing system in general and the institutional mechanisms that can be developed based on the new Law on Social Housing adopted by the Serbian parliament. Key word: social housing providers, management and delivery systems, institutional developments in social housing. Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Volkshuisvesting in Europa Een overzicht Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Volkshuisvesting in Europa Een overzicht This presentation will focus on institutional and organisational developments in social housing provision. My contribution is explicitly written to link developments in several European countries to the housing system Serbia is building. These countries, Italy, Belgium, England and the Netherlands (Holland) are pragmatically selected to place developments in Serbia in perspective by providing examples that could be useful for this country. Extra motivation to include Belgium and Italy in this comparison, is that both countries are often not included in international comparative social housing studies due to the small size of their social housing stock (see for example Whitehead and Scanlon, 2007). Both countries have a federal structure with regions responsible for housing policy and housing models with some very interesting features. For Belgium I will focus and the Flanders region and for Italy on the region of Lombardy. Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Nederland Source: CECODHAS European Social Housing Observatory (2008)

Source: Whitehead and Scanlon, (2007) Social Housing in Europe

Source: Housing Europe, 2007. Cecodhas Housing tenures Source: Housing Europe, 2007. Cecodhas

Affordable housing in the private rental market Source: Housing Europe, 2007. Cedhocas

Who owns and manages social housing? Source: Whitehead and Scanlon, (2007) Social Housing in Europe

Nederlandse sociale huursector is bijzonder Qua omvang Qua type: zowel unitair als vangnet Qua eigendom en zeggenschap Overheid én huurders op afstand In de praktijk vinden we hier geen tweede van

Europa in de Volkshuisvesting Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Europa in de Volkshuisvesting This presentation will focus on institutional and organisational developments in social housing provision. My contribution is explicitly written to link developments in several European countries to the housing system Serbia is building. These countries, Italy, Belgium, England and the Netherlands (Holland) are pragmatically selected to place developments in Serbia in perspective by providing examples that could be useful for this country. Extra motivation to include Belgium and Italy in this comparison, is that both countries are often not included in international comparative social housing studies due to the small size of their social housing stock (see for example Whitehead and Scanlon, 2007). Both countries have a federal structure with regions responsible for housing policy and housing models with some very interesting features. For Belgium I will focus and the Flanders region and for Italy on the region of Lombardy. Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute 10

Europa in de Volkshuisvesting Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Europa in de Volkshuisvesting Volkshuisvesting valt niet onder de veranderwoordelijkheid van de Europese Commissie (EC) maar onder die van de lidstaten. Subsidiariteitsbeginsel ... maar wat wel onder de bevoegdheden van de EC valt zijn: Competitie / Staatsteun / Sociale cohesie / Integratie / Energie & Duurzaamheid / BTW .... This presentation will focus on institutional and organisational developments in social housing provision. My contribution is explicitly written to link developments in several European countries to the housing system Serbia is building. These countries, Italy, Belgium, England and the Netherlands (Holland) are pragmatically selected to place developments in Serbia in perspective by providing examples that could be useful for this country. Extra motivation to include Belgium and Italy in this comparison, is that both countries are often not included in international comparative social housing studies due to the small size of their social housing stock (see for example Whitehead and Scanlon, 2007). Both countries have a federal structure with regions responsible for housing policy and housing models with some very interesting features. For Belgium I will focus and the Flanders region and for Italy on the region of Lombardy. Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute 11

Nederlandse corporatiestelsel en Europa In december 2009 is pvereenstemming tussen “Den Haag” en “Brussel”: Commissie keurt wijzigingen in Nederlands stelsel van volkshuisvesting goed” Wat was de voorgeschiedenis? Wat zijn de wijzigingen? Wat zijn consequenties???

De wijzigingen samengevat: Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision De wijzigingen samengevat: Overeenkomst tussen EC en Van der Laan: Minimaal 90% van de woningen onder de huurtoeslaggrens (< € 647) moet worden toegewezen aan de doelgroep belastbaar jaarinkomen < € 33.000) De rest (10%) mag aan hogere inkomens worden toegewezen mist deze om andere redenen moeite ondervinden in het vinden van een eigen huis (ouderen, gehandicapten). Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute 13

Voorgeschiedenis #1 Nederlandse regering heeft in 2005 staatssteun zelf gemeld bij EC. EC heeft in hetzelfde jaar gemeld dat zij twijfels had over compatibiliteit met staatssteun regels. Nederlandse regering heeft op 3 december 2009 zelf voorstellen voor aanpassing stelsel naar EC gestuurd.

Voorgeschiedenis #2 IVBN (Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed Nederland heeft in april 2007 een klacht ingediend Vesteda sloot zich hier in 2009 bij aan Klacht: corporaties begeven zich met staatsteun op het duurdere huursegment begaven en vervalsend daarmee de concurrentie.

Aard van de klachten Klacht: corporaties begeven zich met staatsteun op het duurdere huursegment en vervalsend daarmee de concurrentie Corporaties houden huren beneden marktniveau en beïnvloeden daarmee het algemene huurniveau (kenmerk van Universalistisch / Unitair housing system) Alle partijen moeten toegang hebben tot staatssteun als zij betaalbare woningen bouwen.

Wat is dan die overheidssteun? Overheidsgarantie voor corporatieleningen via WSW (Waarborgfonds Sociale Woningbouw) Ondersteuning via CFV (Centraal Fonds Volkshuisvesting) Verkoop van gemeentegrond tegen prijzen onder de marktwaarde Recht om tegen gunstige voorwaarden te lenen van de BNG (Bank Nederlandse Gemeenten)

Wat is het probleem? Artikel 107 TFEU: “Any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.” TFEU=Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Wat is de oplossing? Financiering ter compensatie voor het leveren van Diensten van Algemeen Economisch belang (DAEB) is geen staatssteun Lidstaten mogen zelf vaststellen wat een DAEB is. De Commissie vindt dat sociale menging en sociale samenhang beleidsdoelstellingen zijn, waarvoor staatssteun gerechtvaardigd kan zijn. Criteria voor deze compensatie zijn genoemd in het Altmark-arrest (2004) van het Europees Hof van Justitie.

Altmark-criteria: De begunstigde onderneming moet daadwerkelijk belast zijn met de uitvoering van DAEB, verplichtingen moeten duidelijk omschreven zijn. (Woningwet / BBSH) De parameters op basis waarvan de compensatie wordt berekend, moeten vooraf op objectieve en doorzichtige wijze worden vastgesteld. (??) De compensatie mag niet hoger zijn dan nodig is om de kosten van de uitvoering van DAEB, rekening houdend met de opbrengsten alsmede met een redelijke winst uit de uitvoering van die verplichtingen, geheel of gedeeltelijk te dekken. (??) Wanneer de keuze niet is gemaakt in het kader van een openbare aanbesteding, moet het bedrag van de compensatie worden vastgesteld aan de hand van de kosten die een gemiddelde, goed beheerde onderneming zou hebben gemaakt. (??)

Beoordeling Altmark-criteria EC vindt dat Nederland niet heeft aangetoond dat steun aan woningcorporaties voldoet aan Altmark criteria. EC vindt met name dat huidige steun niet voldoet aan criterium 4: compensatie moet worden vastgesteld aan de hand van de kosten die een gemiddelde, goed beheerde onderneming zou hebben gemaakt. Nieuw voorstel van de Nederlandse regering voldoet wel aan die criteria.

Overeenkomst De nieuwe regels worden vastgelegd in een bestuursmaatregel (AMvB) met ingang van 1 Januari 2010 en in de nieuwe Woningwet vanaf 1 Januari 2011. Doelgroep voor sociale huurwoningen zijn individuen met een belastbaar jaarinkomen inkomen lager van € 33.000-- (oude ziekenfondsgrens in 2005). Dit is circa 43% van de bevolking, gemiddeld inkomen is € 38.000 per jaar. De maximale huur voor sociale woningen is € 647,53 per maand (huurtoeslaggrens). Beide bedragen worden jaarlijks geïndexeerd.

Maatschappelijk vastgoed en verkoop Alleen vastgoed dat een publiek doel dient en bijfdraag aan de leefbaarheid van buurten (zoals buurthuizen, jongerencentra e.d.) komen in aanmerking voor steun. Er is hiervoor een limitatieve lijst opgesteld Bouwen en verkopen van woningen en het bouwen en verhuren van commercieel vastgoed wordt uitgesloten van overheidsondersteuningen.

Woningtoewijzing Van woningen met een huur lager dan € 647,53 moet minimaal 90% worden toegewezen aan de doelgroep (inkomen < € 33.000). Primaire doelgroep De resterend 10% moet worden toegewezen op basis van objectieve voorrangscriteria. Huishoudens krijgen voorrang als zij ondanks een inkomen boven de grens ondersteuning nodig hebben (b.v. grote gezinnen, ouderen, gehandicapten). Secundaire doelgroep

Toezicht en Sancties Een betrouwbaar mechanisme moet ontwikkeld worden om navolging van de regels op het niveau van individuele woningcorporaties te waarborgen en te monitoren. Toezicht ligt bij het Centraal Fonds Volkhuisvesting (CFV), vanaf 2011 Nederlandse Autoriteit Toegelaten Instellingen Volkshuisvesting Het mechanisme moet maatregelen omvatten om financiële sancties op te leggen om teveel gegeven steun terug te vorderen bij corporaties die de toewijzingscriteria niet respecteren. Teruggevorderde staatsteun zal in een fonds worden gestort om publieke taken te financieringen. De Nederlandse autoriteiten zullen de EC informeren over de uitkomsten van deze monitoring.

Regionale differentiatie #1 Als er onverwacht onvoldoende woningzoekenden uit de primaire doelgroep zich melden voor een sociale woning mag de corporatie bij wijze van uitzondering meer dan 10% toewijzen aan de secundaire doelgroep. Maar ... de corporatie heeft dan geen recht op steun van het WSW of het CFV voor de bouw of aankoop van nieuwe woningen totdat het kan aantonen dat er voldoende vraag vanuit de primaire doelgroep is.

Regionale differentiatie #2 In uitzonderlijke gevallen mag de minister met een bestuursmaatregel (AMvB) de grens van 90% verlagen als de regionale woningmarkt daar aanleiding toe geeft. De grens mag nooit lager zijn dan 80% en de maatregel mag niet langer dan 4 jaar van kracht zijn. Om deze lagere grens te compenseren krijgen woningcorporaties in een of meer andere regio's een hoger percentage opgelegd, zodat het gemiddelde percentage voor alle corporaties weer minimaal 90% is.

Regionale differentiatie #3 Woningcorporaties die gebruik maken van deze uitzonderingmaatregel zullen hun (woning-toewijzings)beleid moeten aanpassen zodat zij binnen 4 jaar weer op de 90% zitten. De regionale differentiatie is pas mogelijk na de invoering van de nieuwe woningwet (gepland per 1 januari 2011)

Commerciële activiteiten en maatschappelijk vastgoed Commerciële activiteiten van woningcorporaties moeten gescheiden worden van hun publieke taken en zullen niet langer ondersteuning krijgen. Er moeten mechanismen komen die dit transparant maken en controleren. Er moeten tenderprocedures komen voor de ontwikkeling van maatschappelijk vastgoed. Dit moet het voor private (profit) partijen mogelijk maken om deel te nemen aan deze tenders. Corporaties moeten lage huren vragen aan de huurders van maatschappelijk vastgoed. Dit moet worden bewaakt en het niet navolgen van deze bepaling moet leiden terugbetaling van ontvangen steun.

Aanpassing woningvoorraad Woningcorporaties moeten met hun aanbod van sociale woningen anticiperend afstemmen op de verwachte omvang van de doelgroep. Een te lage toewijzing van sociale woningen aan kandidaten uit de primaire doelgroep leidt tot financiële sancties. Dit geeft een prikkel om het aanbod aan te passen aan de werkelijke vraag van de aandachtsgroep.

Mogelijke reacties woningcorporaties Regels negeren en boete betalen Woningen verkopen Woningen in huurprijs verhogen tot boven de € 647,53 (huurtoeslaggrens) Fuseren met een corporatie met een hoog percentage toewijzingen aan de doelgroep Meer gebruik maken van Huren-op-Maat. ??

Volkshuisvesting in Europa De dynamiek: markt, staat en maatschappij Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Volkshuisvesting in Europa De dynamiek: markt, staat en maatschappij Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute 32

State Third sector Community Market Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision I Formal Non-profit Informal State Profit Public Private III Third sector IV II Community Market In this presentation I will use a public management framework to discuss different coordination mechanism that could be involved in social housing provision and the impact this has on providers, tasks, regulation and performance assessment. This framework was developed by Brandsen et al. (2005). The authors argue that public services (including health, education but also affordable housing) are provided in an environment with three different and sometimes mixed coordination mechanism: (I) the State (which also includes regions and local authorities); (II) the market and (IV) self-organisation initiatives by individuals or groups of citizens also referred to as "community" initiatives. These three major divisions combine in a fourth, hybrid sphere were market, community and state drivers are mixed. This segment is also called civil society or the third sector. In this sector an increasing number of social housing initiatives take place. Brandsen, T. ,Van de Donk, W. and Putters, K. (2005) Griffins or chameleons? Hybridity as a permanent and inevitable characteristic of the third sector, in International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 28, No. 9, pp. 749-765. Individual Brandsen et al., 2005 Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Social housing models 1 2 5 4 3 I State III IV II Market Community Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision In many European countries different forms and providers of affordable housing co-exist, involving operators from the public sector, the non-profit sector (also called third sector) and the private sector: 1.Public housing companies; owned by municipalities, provinces or regions (England and Italy) Housing associations (Belgium, England and The Netherlands Housing co-operatives (England and Italy, but also Sweden, Austria) Private Investment Companies (England, but also in Germany) Family supported housing solutions (Italy) Almost all providers receive state support, or did so in the past. This brief overview of some of social housing models in Europe shows that there are various possibilities for organising a social housing sector. These housing providers are interrelated. There are points of convergence between public and private interests. Private and non-profit organisations, capable of acting autonomously, are connected with local communities but also with public housing policies. Often complex accreditation and supervision systems govern the proper operation and transparency of the sector, because market rules are not always applicable and the presence of considerable subsidies renders it necessary to ensure that resources are properly used. Social housing models Public housing Housing associations 3. Housing cooperatives 4. Private rental market 5. Self-built housing I Non-profit Formal Informal State 1 Public Private 2 III III III 5 4 3 IV II Market Community Individual Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

(England, the Netherlands, Italy) Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Social housing models pathways #1 Privatisation (Quasi) markets (England, the Netherlands, Italy) I State 1 III Third sector Housing associations (HAs) in England own and manage around 8% of the housing stock; approximately 2 million dwellings; 10% is managed by local authorities (Whitehead and Scanlon, 2007). This division of providers changed dramatically over the past 40 years. Since 1988 almost all new houses were built by housing associations. Ownership of the social sector stock is thus now spread among some 2.000 HAs of which nearly 10% is formed by Large Scale Voluntary Stock Transfers (LSVT’s) of municipal housing stock, together with around 200 local authorities which have not transferred all of their stock to HAs. Part of the stock of Local authorities is managed by Arms Length Management Organizations (ALMO’s). These organisations have some operational autonomy but still fall under the responsibility of the municipality In the 1980s and 1990s all Dutch municipal housing companies transformed into new housing associations or their housing stock was sold to exiting social landlords. A little side-step from our selected countries: in Germany many municipal housing companies have been sold to private investment companies often with a temporary provision to keep these dwellings affordable. In Italy many municipalities out-source their management to private organizations. The municipality of Milan did so from 2003 until 2008 but is bringing it’s housing stock back under management of the regional housing company ALER due to mismanagement and fraud by the private management organisation. IV II Market Community Individual Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

From government to governance The state is pulling out of affordable housing provision Market State Public (often municipal) housing companies Arms Length Management Organizations (ALMO’s) Housing Associations Private Investors Home owners Secondary sales England England Germany The Netherlands England’s “Right to Buy” Germany

Social Housing Models Pathways #2 Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Social Housing Models Pathways #2 Increased market orientation of housing associations (The Netherlands, England) I I State 2 III 2 2 Third sector Many housing initiatives in the countries we focus on have started in the second half of the 19th century motivated by the quest to tackle severe forms of housing deprivation. These initiatives where supported by individuals like catholic priests, protestant ministers, enlightened industrials and civil society movements often linked to specific religious or political groups. In the Netherlands, for example, many public services like housing, cooperative banks and insurance companies, schools and trade unions where organised in catholic, protestant, social-democratic and liberal ‘pillars’. This phenomenon slowly disappeared in the last decades of the 20th century. Roots of the original civil society initiatives can still be found, but have often merged into larger group structures or conglomerates of social housing providers. In England and The Netherlands housing associations have a relative large share in the housing stock. They most often have the legal status of foundation, association or charitable trust (only in England). In Flanders social housing providers have shareholders, often being municipalities and civil society organisations. In most countries the state only began to be involved in the beginning of the 20th century. In the Netherlands the first Housing Law was introduces in 1901, Italy followed shortly in 1903. These laws were intended to support and regulation social housing initiatives. In Flanders, The Netherlands and England non-state social housing providers have to be accredited in order to receive subsidies or other support. This status of ‘Registered Social Landlord’ (RSL’s) brings the benefits of government support but also comes with regulation, supervision and performance assessments. IV II Community Market Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Increased market orientation of housing cooperatives (Italy) Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Social Housing Models Pathways #3 Increased market orientation of housing cooperatives (Italy) I State III Third sector 3 3 Italy has a very strong co-operative tradition, non only in housing. In general, housing cooperatives in Italy developed two distinct types of housing co-ops. One type is called a social housing co-op. In this case, the housing unit remains owned by the cooperative organization that provides subsidized housing for low-income families, elderly, immigrants, and other special needs populations. The other is a conventional housing cooperative provided basically under market conditions. However, due to special government financing, the apartments are sold to members slightly below market value and usually has equity restrictions on resale that are released over a period of 20 years (Source: ICA Housing Coop website ). Some housing cooperatives can also be found in the England but they constitute a very small segment of the housing stock. In the Netherlands and Flanders there or no social housing cooperatives to speak of. IV II Market Community Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

New social housing private providers of (Italy, Flanders, England) Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Social Housing Models Pathways #4 New social housing private providers of (Italy, Flanders, England) I State III Third sector 4 In England the government is supporting Private Finance Initiatives (PFI). In 2007 the government allocated up to £1.87 billion of new Private Finance Initiative (PFI) credits for local authorities to regenerate neighbourhoods and increase the supply of affordable rented housing in part funded by private investors. In the Netherlands private providers are not very interested in entering the social housing market. This due to the absense of development subsidies and the size and power of the incumbent social housing actors Some Dutch building companies have introduced concept for low-cost homes for sale. The region of Flanders in Belgium wants to increase it’s social housing stock by compelling municipalities with no or very limited numbesr of social housing to built more. A new spatial planning degree (Grond- en pandendecreet) makes it possible to attach to some development locations the obligation to built a number of social dwellings These locations could be owned by public and private actors. This could potentially lead to these private actors becoming active in the social housing market. Another possibility is that private developers will form partnerships with exiting social housing providers passing on the responsibility of housing management to social landlords. In Italy housing policy housing property investment funds are seen as a promising new instrument to attract new providers into social housing. A property fund is autonomous capital divided into shares belonging to several participants (investors), managed by a Societa di Gestione del Risparmio (SGR - asset management company). Investment funds are robust financial instruments widely used in the for-profit real estate sector. IV II Community Market Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Beyond state, market and third sector: residents and community Supervision from a tenant's perspective (England) Tenant Management Organizations (England)

Social housing model pathways #5 State III Third sector Discussion focused on shift from state to market in affordable housing provision. Far less attention is paid to inclusion of third sector / civil society. IV II Market Community Individual

Tenant focused supervision in England OLD Supervision and Funding in housing provision Funding and Support in Community development NEW Funding and support in housing and community development Supervision

The National Conversation

Tenant Management Organizations (TMO) Right to Manage Regulation. Tenants of English council housing have the possibility to choose their own housing management organization. TMO’s need to demonstrate competence.

Some trends in social housing provision Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Some trends in social housing provision The state is retreating from social housing provision Mix of state, non-profit, community and private providers Focus on socially mixed housing estates Housing tailored to the needs of special care groups (elderly, disabled and other vulnerable groups) Housing not as a goal but as an instrument to create cohesive communities and support people to get on with their lives. Although there are very considerable differences between the social rental models across Europe, there are also overlapping trends and tensions (Whitehead and Scalon, 2007). Overall, social rented sectors predominantly that focuses on rental homes for the lower income groups are declining and varying forms of public/private partnerships are becoming more important. Improving and modifying the existing stock to meet rising aspirations and to reduce concentrations of poor quality housing are seen as priority issues in most countries. In the majority of countries there is increasing debate on how to meet the housing needs particularly for the most vulnerable and deprived households. In Flanders the role of social housing providers is still relatively narrow. However, some do provide special needs housing and employ ‘social housing assistants’ to support tenants and facilitate social cohesion. Some Flemish social housing providers are collaborating with other organizations that provide support services to tenants. Italian public social housing providers, for example the regional housing agency for the region of Lombardy ALER mainly focus on traditional landlord activities. Italian Housing cooperatives are focused on creating social cohesive communities for their members. One of the main challenges is creating intergenerational communities by mixing older residents with new families. NHF (2008) Neighbourhood audit. London: National Housing Federation Scalon, K. and Whitehead, C. (2008) Social Housing in Europe II. London: LSE Whitehead, C. and Scalon, K. (2007) Social Housing in Europe I . London: LSE Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision In many countries social housing providers are being asked to take on a variety of new responsibilities in addition to their traditional landlord activities. These tasks can include local roles such as the provision of special needs housing and neighbourhood management services (heating, neighbourhood wardens, etc.); and more social roles, such as promoting social cohesion, supporting individuals and leading neighbourhood regeneration initiatives (Whitehead and Scalon, 2007). Housing associations in England have for some time already been active in this broad an sometime vague field of activities (NHF, 2008). Some focus on individual well-being, social inclusion of young adults, elderly and vulnerable people. Like housing associations, local authority housing departments and ALMO’s as well are involved activities supporting individuals and communities. Housing associations in the Netherlands are also increasingly involved in activities improving the liveability of neighbourhoods by investing in community cohesion initiatives and investing in community facilities. However, Compared to their English counterparts the Dutch are still rather focused on brick-and-mortar investments. They do however collaborate with and provide funding for government agencies and third-sector organizations that provide care and support residents. This new focus is illustrated by the way housing associations in England (and the Netherlands) present themselves in their company logo’s. Of course it is possible to be cynical about this and classify this as Corporate PR and rhetoric to look more favorable in the eyes of government funders, but their is ample evidence that housing associations are delivering at least some of what the promise (NHF, 2008). Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute

Hier cover neighbourhood audit

Affordable housing in the private rental market Many low income households are dependent on housing in the private rental sector Especially in countries with a small social rental sector Private landlords do not like to rent to households on welfare benefits Rent supplements can lead to cost inflation Quality of affordable private rental properties is often low Initiatives to expand affordable homes by making part of the private rental stock more ‘social’.

Affordable housing in the private rental market Social Rental Offices [Sociale Verhuur Kantoren] (Flanders) Rental Accommodation Scheme (RAS) (Ireland) Acquire rental homes from the private market These organizations are part of (or closely linked with) the local authorities Rents are often below market level, because Social Rental Offices are stabile tenants, provide support to their tenants and invest in the property. Remains a small initiative (5.000 in Ireland, 4.000 Flanders)

Institutional and organizational change in affordable housing provision Social Rental Offices (Flanders) & Rental Accommodation Schemes (RAS) in Ireland Organizations are part of (or closely linked with) the local authorities Acquire rental homes from the private market Tenants receive a housing allowance Rents are often below market level, because Social Rental Offices are stabile lessees and provide support to their tenants and invest in the property Remains a small initiative (5.000 in Ireland, 4.000 Flanders) Social Rental Offices in Flanders are often connected to the welfare departments of municipalities. In general they are able to negotiate below market rents because they can guarantee rent payments and take care of small maintenance works and support tenants. For real estate owners it easier to cancel rental agreements with the Social Rental Offices than with individual tenants. Tenants can receive a rent allowance depending on their income and the rent of the dwelling. An additional advantage is that the implementation of this social housing model does not lead to territorial segregation of the poor into „ghettos“. Houses will probable be relatively equally distributed on the urban territory. Similar program can be found in the Republic of Ireland (Rental Accommodation Scheme) and in Spain. In these countries the Social Rental Offices are used to supplement social housing provided by housing associations and/or municipal housing companies. Gerard van Bortel, Delft University of Technology, OTB Research Institute