Temporary tenure - a normalization of the transitory character of renting

permanent contracts that made renting a sustainable alternative to homeownership. The introduction of temporary contracts, therefore, "can be viewed as (emerging) islands of Anglo-Saxon rental norms within that system" (Huisman, 2016, p. 27), where two-year contracts by housing associations became introduced in housing reforms (Kemp, 2015).

This section looks at the specificities of short-term contracts in the cities of Brussels and Amsterdam.

In 2014, the sixth state reform housing policy in Belgium was regionalized, resulting in the regionalization of homeownership bonuses (Bernard & Lemaire, 2015). The Brussels Capital Region was then the first region to reform its housing leases, which came into force in 2018 (Loyens & Loeff, 2017). While short-term contracts of three years existed before 2017, a maximum of two leases could be provided within this time. With the new rules, an endless number of short-term contracts within the three-year duration can now be conducted (Commissioner.brussels, n.d.). Additionally, student contracts of one year and contracts of less than six months were also introduced (Brouwers & De Jonge, 2018).

The reforms in tenure law, however, fragilizes tenants, as short-term contracts now can be ended without notice, significantly decreasing tenant protection Interview (Legal Housing Expert, 2022). Tenants' position in the Brussels rental market traditionally was of a high standard, and leases of 9 years or indefinite duration were the norm.

Theoretically, even in leases of less than three years, landlords could only terminate the contract if they or family members moved into the dwelling. As the lease duration increased, landlords would have to pay up to 9 months of rent to the tenant in case of termination (Service Public Regional de Bruxelles-Bruxelles Logement, n.d.).

These tenure reforms were driven by the increasing presence of short-term workers in European institutions in Brussels, and while they were not intended “for the normal tenant," they are likely part of a more extensive restructuring as landlords get accustomed to short leases. Rather than letting landlords take risks of people terminating earlier, the new reforms privileged landlords' position and restricted tenants' access to multiple-year leases (Interview Legal Housing Expert, 2022). This put a plurality of groups in insecure tenure, illustrating that “security of tenure is measured not based on a tenant’s long-term need, but simply by contractual agreement between landlord and tenant” (Carr et al., 2015, p. 10).

For Amsterdam, a similar shift towards short-term contracts has taken place. As traditionally, social housing was seen as a natural alternative to homeownership, permanent contracts with high tenant protection were the norm, making renting in the Netherlands a secure tenure (Huisman & Mulder, 2020). In the aftermath of the GFC, when homeowners had difficulties selling their houses, temporary house-sharing was permitted through the diplomatic clause, and campus contracts were introduced. In 2016, through the Housing Ordinance reform (Huisvestingsverordening), the expectational status of temporary leases was adopted as a standard tenure type. Current lease forms are

i) fixed-term contracts of two years, ii) campus contracts for students, iii) intermediate tenancy (diplomatic clause), iv) renting out space through the vacancy law, v) vacation rental, and vi) permanent (indefinite contract) (Rijksoverheid, n.d.).

According to an interview with the municipality of Amsterdam, the government believed this would encourage more landlords to rent apartments and free up more housing throughout the city. Although this reduced the threshold for renting, the government arguably assumed that this initial two-year period would help landlords keep tenants later, as leases with the same tenants after this period would turn into indefinite ones (Interview Municipality of Amsterdam, 2022).

In reality, tenants are frequently kicked out after two years, as landlords prefer new short-term contracts that allow them to continuously set higher rents and gain profits (Huisman, 2016). Housing associations could now also freely use campus contracts, which end six months after graduation, and youth contracts for people aged 18-27 in shared housing.

Another feature that introduces tenure precarity is the attachment of contract duration to dwelling characteristics. Based on the 2016 reform, fixed-term temporary leases are limited to a maximum of two years for dependent accommodation and five years for independent accommodation (Rijksoverheid, n.d.). This distinction is crucial for student housing in Amsterdam, as rooms in shared housing do not count as independent accommodation. Independent accommodation is defined as “self-contained housing, is housing with its entrance and in which your household has its own kitchen, toilet, and bath. These are single-family homes or apartments" (Rijksoverheid, n.d.). Studios also fall into this category. This means that students in shared housing only receive contracts for two years at most, while students living in commercially built studios (or apartments) that count as independent housing can stay the whole duration of their study (more in 4.3.3)

For tenants, it only reinforces housing insecurity in not knowing how long they can remain in their homes. Research on the rental market in Amsterdam found that young people are most likely to accept temporary leases, namely 52% of all 18-23 years olds.

Additionally, house sharers, students, movers from abroad, and non-Western migrants are most likely to rent on a temporary lease (Huisman & Mulder, 2020). As the researchers argued, "the normalization of temporary leases could considerably accelerate the already

escape from insecure tenure" or "lead to a complete precaritization of the private rental sector, and growth thereof" (p.3). They anticipated that analogous to the UK, commercial or individual landlords would exclusively offer temporary leases and focus on housing students or young people to whom these leases would be targeted (Huisman & Mulder, 2020).

4.3.3 Amsterdam: rental market re-regulation & the signs of a dualized student housing market

In the previous sections, I have argued that discussed the introduction of short-term tenancies as an indicator of housing precarity and have been critical of rent regulation. In this section, I will showcase signs of a dualization in the student housing market of Amsterdam.

The usage of the term 'dualization' in this context has been inspired by Arundel and Lennartz's (2018) paper on dualization in the labor market and housing outcomes. They argued that the "dualization of more securely employed insiders and insecurely (un)employed outsiders" (ibid., p.4) evident in labor markets is insightful also for housing market dynamics. In their study, the indicators of housing market dualization were equity, tenure security, and asset accumulation prospects (ibid, p. 23).

In this research on non-European student housing, I use rental market dualization for the structural differences between shared housing and studios in purpose-built student accommodation. The indicators are contract duration (discussed in 4.1), accessibility (to shared housing), and housing allowances. Additionally, as empirical interview findings show, this dualization, to a certain extent, also exists within students' pathways and living preferences (see 5.2.1), although these findings cannot be generalized.

Through the 2016 housing reform, it has been established that short-term contracts were made the norm, which for students in shared housing signifies a maximum contract duration, while students in rooms by housing associations or in purpose-built developments qualify for campus contracts for the entire duration of their study. Starting from the 2016 reform until the current 2020 reform, shared housing has become re-regulated.

This re-regulation in Amsterdam's housing market has already been outlined by Hochstenbach & Ronald (2020), stating that the government-induced liberalizations of the rental market had only been retrospectively re-regulated by municipal policies. For

house sharing, too, a re-regulation occurred. While landlords in the Netherlands, even in the 1980s, needed a permit for house sharing, this was never strictly enforced as tenants had rental security, and the municipality did not experience house sharing as a disturbing phenomenon in need of regulation (Interview Municipality of Amsterdam, 2022).

The following 2020 housing reform was based on three principles, namely i) good livability in the neighborhood, ii) enough available apartments for house-sharing, and iii) protection of renters. For the first principle, quotas for shared housing were introduced.

Per neighborhood, 5% of the housing stock over 60 sqm, the adequate size for house-sharing of more than three people, was given to shared housing. The percentage was calculated based on 'good neighborhood composition,' which meant that the 5% would account for the 12,000 addresses that were registered for house-sharing of more than three people, plus an additional growth of 1,000 new registered addresses that would satisfy the demand for shared housing (Interview Municipality of Amsterdam, 2022).

Additionally, in the name of 'good livability,' only 25% of one building could be used for shared housing. For 11 neighborhoods inside the ring road and Ijlburg Oost outside, house-sharing permits are already not available anymore, and in 4 other neighborhoods, only limited permits can be given out (Kaart Gemeente Amsterdam, n.d.). To protect renters, each tenant within shared housing had to receive an individual contract (Gemeente Amsterdam, n.d.)

For students, who live in shared housing under the new regulation, rental contracts would be more secure and affordable. However, applications for new permits have slowed since 2020, mainly due to the obligation for individual contracts, making renting less lucrative for landlords, as they can charge less rent for rooms than within a combined free-market rental contract (Interview Municipality of Amsterdam, 2022). One of two things has happened to students who continue living in shared housing of the previous regulations.

Either students have been pushed out of overcrowded apartments as landlords try to follow the new regulation, or they live in semi-illegal accommodation, where landlords, for example, do not give out address registrations because this would put them on the radar. These developments, at least in the transition phase, have made it structurally more difficult for students to access shared housing when moving or have led to a reinforcement of precarious conditions in apartments under the old regulation, where students' housing options depend on landlords' mercy (and financial interest).

More of individual relevance for student housing is the housing allowances that do not apply to shared housing and make purpose-built student accommodation a more beneficial option. Housing allowances in the Netherlands allow tenants to access both the private and social rental housing market, and in the case of the former, the allowance is paid directly to the tenants (Agiro & Matusitz, 2011). The payment of these allowances is indirectly linked to the status of units. According to the government, individual (dependent) rooms automatically fall within the regulated segment, as rents for rooms, according to the Dutch point system, in theory, cannot exceed the liberalization threshold.

In this sense, no student in Amsterdam should be paying more than €763,47 for a rented room; therefore, housing allowances are not deemed necessary (Rijksoverheid n.d).

While this also applies to studios, base rents of PBSA for students are frequently purposefully kept under the liberalization threshold, entitling them to housing allowances.

Age restrictions further complicate this matter. People under 23 only receive housing allowances if their rent does not exceed €442,46, while over 23 years old’s receive allowances for rent of up to €763,47 (Rijksoverheid, n.d.) In practice, this leads to the peculiar situation where, according to calculations of the Vrije Universiteit, students who are older than 23 should and rent studios from, e.g., The Fizz Spartaan (PBSA) with a rent of €760,00 are eligible for rental allowances of €320,00, which results in rent of

€437,00 for a studio. Meanwhile, all students from my interview sample that lived in shared housing paid more than €650 for a room, and rents of €800 upwards were not irregular. As my interviewee from the UvA housing office summarized:

So with all the facilities, you are eligible for the allowance if you are the right age, but what is happening- all the studios and all the commercial housing providers- is that all the students get rent allowance so they can afford more than they would otherwise be able to. There are many people renting very expansive on the private market who don't get any rent allowance, so it doesn't actually say anything about who needs support.

(Interview UvA 2021-Amsterdam)