6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Exclusion as urban policy: The Dutch ‘Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems’

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Dutch government introduced the Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems in 2006 to bolster local regeneration efforts. The act enables local governments to stop specific groups of deprived households from moving into designated neighbourhoods. More specifically, the Act allows local governments to refuse a residence permit to persons who have lived in the metropolitan region for less than six years and who do not receive an income from work, pensions or student loans. The policy is based on the idea that reducing the influx of poor newcomers improves liveability by providing a temporary relief of the demand for public services and by making neighbourhoods demographically ‘balanced’ or ‘socially mixed’. This review examines the socio-spatial effects of the Act in Rotterdam between 2006 and 2013. While the Act produces socio-demographic changes, the state of the living environment in designated areas seems to be worsening rather than improving. Our findings show that the policy restricts the rights of excluded groups without demonstrably improving safety or liveability. The review concludes with a reflection on how the Act may signify a broader change in European statecraft and urban policy.

          摘要

          荷兰政府在 2006 年出台了《城市问题非常措施法案》以推动地方再生工作。该法案使得地方政府可以阻止特定的贫困家庭群体搬入指定的街区。更具体而言,该法案允许地方政府拒绝向在大都市区居住不到六年的人以及未通过工作、养老金或学生贷款获得收入的人发放居住许可证。这项政策基于的思路是减少贫困人口的流入能暂时缓解公共服务需求,并使得街区在人口上“平衡”或“具有社会混合性”,从而改善宜居程度。本评论检视了该方案 2006 至 2013 年间对鹿特丹造成的社会空间影响。虽然该法案带来了社会-人口的变化,但指定区域的生活环境状况似乎在恶化而非改善。我们的研究表明,这项政策限制了被排除群体的权利,同时又没有证据表明改善了街区的安全性或宜居程度。本评论最后反思了该法案如何意味着更大范围的欧洲国家治理和城市政策变革。

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Should Policy Makers Strive for Neighborhood Social Mix? An Analysis of the Western European Evidence Base

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Your Life Chances Affect Where You Live: A Critique of the ‘Cottage Industry’ of Neighbourhood Effects Research

            Tom Slater (2013)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Civilising the City: Populism and Revanchist Urbanism in Rotterdam

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Urban Stud
                Urban Stud
                USJ
                spusj
                Urban Studies (Edinburgh, Scotland)
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0042-0980
                27 July 2017
                August 2018
                : 55
                : 11
                : 2337-2353
                Affiliations
                [1-0042098017717214]University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
                [2-0042098017717214]University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
                [3-0042098017717214]University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
                Author notes
                [*]Wouter van Gent, Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies, Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, Amsterdam 1018 WV, Netherlands. Email: W.P.C.vanGent@ 123456uva.nl
                Article
                10.1177_0042098017717214
                10.1177/0042098017717214
                6195158
                76af5d79-be0d-4754-9eae-a027166ae2a3
                © Urban Studies Journal Limited 2017

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : October 2016
                : May 2017
                Categories
                Policy Reviews

                exclusion,housing,social mixing,socio-spatial analysis,urban policy

                Comments

                Comment on this article