Image: Lemasson-Théobald, A (2019). Retrieved from https://unsplash.com/photos/0H-3a5UDW9E
CLIMATE ADAPTATION
IN SOCIAL HOUSING
CORPORATIONS
A study on factors in decision making
for SHCs in Amsterdam
Rosa van der Laag
Bachelor Thesis Future Planet
Studies
Student number: 12233633
Supervisor: Jannes Willems
Coassessor: Maarten Bavinck
Word count: 9102
1 Abstract
This research investigates the factors involved in the decision making process of social housing corporations (SHCs) in Amsterdam on the topic of climate adaptation measures. As social housing corporations own around 30% of the housing property in Amsterdam, they have a great potential in aiding the climate adaptation process, for example with installing green roofs. Theory on considerations in taking formal and moral responsibility is used to analyze the role that corporations play in the climate adaptation process. Interviews and a document analysis are used the factors influencing decision making. Results indicate that these are various, yet the most prominent factors are an accumulation of regulations and a limited financial capacity of SHCs. Moreover, SHCs indicate that they lack experience, resulting in unclarity concerning costs and benefits and the absent division of responsibilities. Lastly, SHCs wish to protect vulnerable systems such as their property, livability and biodiversity which are important factors in decision making. This research might impact future studies as the conceptual model on considerations in attaining formal and moral responsibilities could be applied to other studies in the urban climate adaptation process.
2
Table of content
Abstract ... 1 1. Introduction ... 3 2. Theoretical Framework ... 4 3. Methodology ... 8 3.1 Research design ... 8 3.2 Methods ... 9 3.3 Operationalization ... 11 3.4 Ethical considerations ... 134. Analysis and results ... 14
4.1 Context of SHCs ... 14 4.2 Formal responsibilities ... 15 4.3 Moral responsibilities ... 23 4.4 Possible interventions... 24 5. Discussion ... 26 6. Conclusion ... 28 7. Bibliography ... 30 8. Appendices ... 34
Appendix I Code Book ... 34
Appendix II List of analyzed documents ... 36
Appendix III Interview questions ... 39
Appendix IV Infographic for policy makers and SHCs ... 41
Appendix V Table with main results ... 42
3
1. Introduction
Cities all over the world are considering strategies to adapt to climate change and involvement of private and civil society actors might be necessary for this process (Uittenbroek, et al., 2019; Tennekes et al., 2014). Climate adaptation is the process of taking measures in human or natural systems to prevent harm by actual or predicted climatic influences (Geneletti & Zardo, 2016).
Social Housing Corporations (SHCs) or housing associations may play a considerate role in climate adaptation in the Netherlands, as they own almost 30% of the Dutch housing stock (Elzen, 2013). Additionally, 60% of housing corporations received complaints from tenants about excessive heat in their home (Boerbooms, n.d.b). Moreover, social housing tenants are relatively old and socio-economically vulnerable. This relates to the description of groups most vulnerable for climate related disasters, such as heat waves or floods (Elsinga & Wassenberg, 2014; Mees et al., 2015). In other words, social housing corporations are involved in the urban climate adaptation process for various reasons.
A complicating factor, however, is that the general tasks of housing corporations are disputed. Mees (2017) describes housing corporations as private actors, while they are also seen as part of a third sector, called the non-profit or voluntary sector (Elzen, 2013; Molenveld et al., 2020). This indicates that some believe SHCs role includes making profit, while others regard their operations as voluntarily. Their main task is often described as providing sufficient housing for low-income groups. They used to provide other services like playgrounds and caretaking of the environment, yet this was before the economic crisis of 2008 (Elsinga & Wassenberg, 2014). Remarkably, in recent documents, such as in van Veen and Boerbooms (2019), new initiatives from housing corporations are presented, including green roofs, parks and façade gardens. Their role is small, however, as these measures are not a deliberate end goal but a component in renovation procedures (Boezeman & de Vries, 2019). Additionally, the enforcement of these adaptation measures is not structural, as Roders and Straub (2015) revealed that very few housing corporations included projected climate change into their policymaking. Concluding, there are different perceptions on the role of SHCs in climate adaptation processes and their tasks in general.
The contradiction of research indicating that SHCs fulfill an inactive role in climate adaptation, while corporations publish documents with novel initiatives, leads to the following research question: ‘What are the factors influencing decision making by social housing corporations in
4 Amsterdam in including or excluding climate adaptation measures from their policy?’. This question is divided into two sub-questions. First, “What are the considerations for attaining formal responsibilities in the climate adaptation process of SHCs?” The second question is “What are the moral responsibilities that SHCs assign to themselves that influence decisions on climate adaptation measures?” These questions are investigated by conducting a qualitative document analysis, including policy documents and annual reports, and interviews with various stakeholders such as SHCs, quasi-governmental organizations and NGOs.
The aim of this research is to investigate the factors that are considered by SHCs for including or excluding climate adaptation from their policy. First, the aim is to conduct interviews with relevant stakeholders in climate adaptation in Amsterdam. These are transcribed and coded using thematic coding. Then, policy documents, mini-surveys and other documents are analyzed using the same thematic coding method. The results of this research are beneficial to SHCs in The Netherlands as they gain insight in motivations, barriers and possible stimulations stated by SHCs in Amsterdam. Also, NGOs, such as Samen Klimaatbestendig, collect and disperse knowledge where needed and the results might assist them in this process. Tenants are also an important stakeholder, as the outcome of this research might increase awareness, support and opportunities for interventions concerning climate adaptation. Lastly, the municipality and the public gain insight in the considerations of SHCs’ decision making processes. Because of a lack of academic work on this topic, this thesis might be a considerate addition to literature on SHCs and climate adaptation in Amsterdam.
This thesis will further discuss the theoretical framework. This is followed by the methodology, including the research design and the operationalization of core concepts. Then, the results are presented, followed by a discussion and conclusion.
2. Theoretical Framework
In this section, the main concepts of climate adaptation and SHCs are explained. This is followed by a description of how these concepts are integrated in the conceptual model used in this research.
Urban Climate Governance (UCG) is the process of governing the stages of planning, implementing, financing, monitoring, and maintaining climate adaptation measures within a
5 city, which includes various stakeholders (Anguelovksi & Carmin, 2011). These stakeholders consist of municipal organizations such as Waternet and Rainproof, NGOs, SHCs, SHCs’ overarching organizations, and tenant associations. During UCG, responsibilities, as displayed in the inner pyramid seen in figure 1, are divided between different phases of urban climate adaptation, such as planning, doing, checking and maintaining (Mees et al., 2012). Responsibilities of SHCs are important in UCG, as according to Runhaar et al. (2012) the main barrier for implementing climate adaptation measures is that no actor takes responsibility or perceives himself as problem owner. Additionally, external influencing factors from the economic, cultural or political side and challenging factors for climate adaptation influence the urban climate adaptation process (Mees, 2014).
Figure 1, Urban Climate Governance framework reprinted from Mees (2014).
This research focusses on the responsibilities in figure 1, which will be used to identify the factors that SHCs assume are relevant for climate adaptation. These are called formal responsibilities, and concern roles or tasks allocated to an actor which are confirmed by other stakeholders in a formal setting (Trell & van Geet, 2019). They are divided into political, juridical and economic considerations and are often divided using pragmatic considerations. Such consideration might concern need, ability and entitlement of stakeholders, and could aid
to establish a fair distribution of tasks and benefits towards all stakeholders in climate adaptation processes (Adger et al., 2017). These considerations might display societal expectations of SHCs that explain the context in which they operate.
Yet, besides their formal role in society, SHCs have informal values and constraints that are shaped by perceptions on the world (North, 1991). SHCs formulate internal, moral or ethical
6 responsibilities, such as providing affordable housing for the greatest number of people. According to Adger et al. (2017), moral responsibility can either concern the protection of vulnerabilities or maintenance of systems. These ethical considerations might be used to investigate motivations for implementing climate adaptation measures, because climate change involves normative aspects, such as fairness. This is mainly due the unequal distribution of consequences of climate change, such as sea level rise and increased natural hazards, over the population (Graham et al., 2015). In other words, considerations for attaining formal responsibilities of SHCs help explain the societal expectations of SHCs, while self-assigned moral responsibilities might be used to formulate internal motivations for implementation of climate adaptation measures. In this study, climate adaptation policy or measures are a dependent factor, while considerations in formal and moral responsibilities are independent. These considerations and responsibilities affect the role SHCs have in climate adaptation, as displayed in figure 2.
Figure 2, conceptual model with formal and moral responsibilities as the independent variable and the climate adaptation measures as the dependent variable.
It is important to note that distinct stakeholders, including different SHCs, perceive spatial measures differently (Wagner et al., 2019). As stated by North (1991), perceptions depend on the actor's background and history, which influences the consideration of what factors are important in the climate adaptation coordination process (Wagner et al., 2019). This subsequently influences SHCs visions on their role within UCG, as their perceptions on formal and moral responsibilities might differ. For example, from an environmental justice perspective
7 one could emphasize the history of systemic allocation of environmental hazards close to minority neighborhoods. Here one could argue for the protection of people based on class and ethnicity, (Shi et al., 2016). Yet from a fairness perspective, the principle of ‘putting the most
vulnerable for climate change first’, such as the elderly and disabled, might be more important (Graham et al., 2015, p. 413; Mees et al., 2015). These considerations are extracted from social movements and therefore not all examples will apply to social housing corporations. However, elements from these discourses might be found in the formulation of motivations. This means that, depending on an organizations’ background and history, different discourses of formal and moral responsibilities might be used in formulating motivations for implementing climate adaptation.
In conclusion, this research tests the influence of considerations in formal and moral responsibilities on climate adaptation measures in SHCs in Amsterdam, as seen in figure 2. This will answer the question of what factors are influencing the decision making of SHCs on climate adaptation.
8
3. Methodology
This section discusses the research design, including data collection. This is followed by a description of methods and the operationalization. Lastly, ethical considerations are discussed.
3.1 Research design
Within this research the dependent variable of climate adaptation policy executed by SHCs is analyzed. This is done by investigating the independent variable of considerations for taking on formal and moral responsibilities in the climate adaptation process. In order to do so, interviews and a document analysis are used to research SHCs’ responsibilities. Interviews are the preferred method for gaining insight in this matter, as there is little literature concerning the topic of SHCs involvement in climate adaptation (see methods for further description). A document analysis is conducted to add to or assess the quality of the information gained from the interviews (further described in the method section). Important to note is that this research was conducted over a timeframe of 3 months from March 1 to May 28 of 2021.
As for the location, Amsterdam is the focus of this research due to three reasons. First, various adaptation initiatives are found in this city, such as the blue-green roof project Resilio and Amsterdam Rainproof. Second, a large proportion of the housing stock in Amsterdam is property of SHCs (Elzen, 2013). This is up to 40% in 2019 according to the website of AFWC (n.d.). The largest corporations in Amsterdam are De Alliantie, De Key, Eigen Haard, Rochdale, Stadgenoot and Ymere, which are researched in this thesis. Additionally there are smaller corporations such as DUWO, Habion and Woonzorg (AFWC, n.d.). Lastly, the municipality of Amsterdam completed a Climate Adaptation Strategy, which includes SHCs as an actor in climate adaptation (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2020a). As the municipality acknowledges SHCs’ role in this process, this may lead to interesting policies or agreements concerning climate adaptation between the two parties.
Data selection is accomplished in several ways. Interview participants are either selected by the researcher or nominated by other participants. The two main criteria are that the interviewee works for or in close cooperation with a SHC and that the interviewee is active in the field of climate adaptation. The selection for the sources for the document analysis focusses on various factors. First, filling knowledge gaps is important. For example, the municipality and the Metropole Area Amsterdam were requested for interviews, however these did not proceed. Therefore, by analyzing their policy documents this knowledge gap was reduced. Second, some
9
documents were additional to information from the interviews, such as news articles and webpages. Lastly, the yearly reports were analyzed to make sure that information from interviews with SHCs employees corresponds with their yearly reports.
3.2 Methods
The first method adopted in this research is interviews with SHCs, NGO's and other stakeholders in climate adaptation (see table 1). During the interviews, a semi-structured interview method is used, with a set of key questions that is listed in appendix III. During the process, however, new questions might be added if needed (Patten & Newhart, 2017). An inductive strategy is be preferred to gain insight in the perceptions of stakeholders without interference of the researcher’s background information. The interviews are recorded with consent of the interviewees and the recordings are then transcribed. The transcripts are sent to the participants before coding to ensure its quality. Limitations of this method are that interviewing, and transcribing are time consuming activities. Yet, they might increase the understanding of an actor’s perspective and generate knowledge in a field where information is limited (Patten & Newhart, 2017). The transcripts are analyzed using ATLAS.ti 8. During the process, a special attention is given to the indicators from the operationalization, which is further explained in the following section. Additionally, several documents are analyzed beforehand, in which terms and phenomena are highlighted. This collection of terms is used during the coding process of the interviews. New codes are added during the process, making the interview analysis abductive. The code book is displayed in appendix I. The transcripts of the interviews are included in appendix VI in a separate document due to its length.
Table 1, list of interviewees and their organizations.
Participant # Organization Type of organization Interviewee Participant 1 Groene Huisvesters Non-governmental organization Lisa Verhaeghe
Participant 2 Aedes Sector organization for SHCs Dorris Derksen Participant 3 Samen Klimaatbestendig Non-governmental organization Marlou Boerbooms Participant 4 Rainproof Quasi-governmental organization Lisette Heijke Participant 5 Alliantie Social housing corporation Renske Zwart
Participant 6 AFWC Sector association for SHCs Frank van der Veek Participant 7 De Key Social housing corporation Daniël Duijnhouwer Participant 8 Eigen Haard Social housing corporation Ilse van Andel
10 Participant 9 Woonbond National tenants’ association Siem Goede Participant 10 Waternet Quasi-governmental organization Kasper Spaan Participant 11 Arcade Tenants association of De Key Harrie Houtbeckers Participant 12 !Woon Tenants organization for tenants in
Amsterdam
Ingrid Houtepen
Participant 13 Rochdale Social housing corporation Imme van Dijk Participant 14 Ministerie van
Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijkrelaties
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Royal Relationships
A representative
The second method used in this thesis is a document analysis, defined by Bowen (2009) as a
qualitative research method to review documents that are produced without the meddling of a researcher. Within this document analysis, thematic coding is used to investigate patterns of specific phenomena, which are, in this case, formal and moral responsibilities (Clarke & Braun, 2014). Both Mendeley and ATLAS.ti are used for this process. Limitations of this method are that this process includes the interpretation of the researcher, and the selection of documents might be biased (Bowen, 2009). However, documents are precise and contain large amounts of useful information (Patten & Newhart, 2017).
The analysis of the documents was conducted in two stages. First, policy documents were analyzed, such as the Climate Adaptation Strategy of Amsterdam, a position paper of Aedes and results from mini surveys conducted by Boerbooms (n.d. b, c & d). These were coded using Mendeley and its note application. This was the preferred option due to problems with downloading ATLAS.ti 8. The code book for these documents is included in Appendix I. A list of keywords is used from the literature study, but new codes are added if necessary. This is an abductive process, which according to Merriam-Webster (n.d.), is the process of drawing a conclusion with the information available.
The second phase of the document analysis concerns the analysis of the most recent yearly reports by six social housing corporations. This is done after most interviews are conducted, so specific themes have been selected beforehand which makes this process inductive. They are analyzed using ATLAS.ti 8 and keywords derived from the interviews that would tell something about motivations or the context of SHCs. The codes used for these documents and the interviews are found in appendix I.
11 Type of document Document # Document Policy documents
Document 1 Gemeente Amsterdam. (2020, Februari 4). Strategie Klimaatadaptatie Amsterdam.
Document 2 Metropoolregio Amsterdam. (2020, March 31). Metropoolregio Amsterdam Klimaatbestendig – plan van aanpak 2020.
Research documents
Document 3 Boerbooms, M. (n.d.b). Hittestress: corporaties hebben behoefte aan kennis en handvaten – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en klimaatadaptatie.
Document 4 Boerbooms, M. (n.d.c). Tuinen: corporaties hebben veel kansen om tuinen te vergroenen – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en klimaatadaptatie.
Document 5 Boerbooms, M. (n.d.d). Blauwgroene daken: corporaties doen eerste ervaringen op – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en klimaatadaptatie.
Yearly report
Document 6 De Alliantie. (2020, April 29). Jaarverslag 2019 Document 7 De Key. (2019). Volkshuisvestingsverslag Document 8 Eigen Haard. (2020, May). Jaarverslag 2019. Document 9 Stadgenoot. (2020, May). Jaarverslag 2019. Document 10 Rochdale. (2020, April 23). Jaarverslag 2019. Document 11 Ymere. (2020). Jaarstukken 2019.
Other Document 12 Aedes. (2018, May). Position paper klimaatakkoord
Document 13 Aedes. (2020, June 8) AEF-rapport: blijf waakzaam in kwetsbare wijken
Document 14 Boerbooms, M. (n.d.a). Fact sheet regelingen voor groen voor investeringen in duurzaamheid en groen wonen voor
woningcorporaties in 2021
Document 15 RTL nieuws (2019, August 26). Corporatie moet oplossingen zoeken voor te heet huis.
3.3 Operationalization
During the data analysis, a list of key words was formulated using scientific literature. In this section, this process is described and visualized using an operationalization. In this research, the considerations for assigning formal and moral responsibilities of social housing corporations are investigated. Formal responsibilities are allocated using six considerations as
12
seen in figure 3, which are fairness, rule of law, efficiency, securing adaptation action, legitimacy and accountability (Mees et al., 2012). To investigate which considerations for formal responsibilities are used in the interviews and documents, certain terms and phenomena serve as indicators. These are derived from Mees (2017) and are presented in table 3.
Figure 3, economic, political and juridical considerations in dividing formal responsibilities reprinted from Mees (2014).
Considerations in assigning moral responsibilities can be operationalized using the argumentation framework of
Adger et al. (2017). These considerations can be divided according to two main arguments, namely vulnerability based and system based arguments. Vulnerability based arguments concern ideas about fairness and protection of those who are vulnerable to climate change. System based arguments, on the other hand, concern ideas about authority and a sense of duty to act in a responsible way towards other citizens. Both these arguments include questions concerning how to act appropriately and fairly towards other stakeholders. To investigate whether system based or vulnerability based arguments are used by SHCs, again terms and phenomena are serving as indicators as seen in table 3.
13
Table 3, operationalization of formal and moral responsibilities. Keywords are retrieved from Adger et al. (2017) and Mees (2017).
Responsibility Consideration Operationalization Indicator Formal
responsibility
Political Legitimacy Accepted by other stakeholders, authority in the field, inclusion of other stakeholders, public/private arrangements
Accountability Transparency, shared responsibility between public and private sector, clear
communication, open to the public Juridical Rule of law Duty of care, regulations, constitutions,
government policies
Fairness Reasonable distribution of burdens, costs and benefits, equal division in society
Economic Efficiency Financial capital, expert knowledge, best allocation of scarce resources, lowest costs through market mechanisms, innovations Securing climate action Secure supply of adaptation goods,
institutionalized procedures, experience Moral
responsibilities
Vulnerability Vulnerability based arguments
Protection, vulnerable people, security, solidarity, equality in burdens and harms System System based arguments Duty, responsibility towards the people,
justice, authority, stability, system protection
3.4 Ethical considerations
This research is in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the University of Amsterdam. The privacy of the interviewees is safeguarded by asking permission to use their name in this research and storing the transcripts in a separate appendix. As a Future Planet Studies Student, I am acquainted with my role in this process, and I made effort to actively eliminate any possible bias during the research. Besides, my entire position is kept as neutral as possible, and the results are interpretated likewise.
14
4. Analysis and results
The results from the document analysis and the interviews are presented as followed. First, the results concerning SHCs operations in general are presented. Then the political, juridical and economic considerations are discussed, followed by the vulnerability and system based arguments. Then, possible interventions mentioned by interviewees are displayed.
4.1 Context of SHCs
Amsterdam is home to an abundance of different SHCs (figure 4). Due to time constraints, however, the six largest SHCs are selected for this research. All these SHCs are intrinsically different when it comes to priorities, kinds of assets, location, organizational structure and priorities concerning sustainability. These differences are also seen in policy on climate adaptation. Participant 10 states that “One board member will show with high ambitions that they are taking steps, while the other executive will look critically at the financial consequences” (appendix VI, p. 79). Some have experimented with initiatives such as RESILIO, while others purposely chose to spent time and funds elsewhere (participant 7; participant 6). Additionally, these differences in policy complicate cooperation with the municipality or other partners (participant 6).
The yearly reports confirmed these differences, as some early birds considered climate adaptation in 2019, while other corporations have alternative priorities. Three out of the six SHCs in this research mentioned climate change in their most recent report. De Alliantie, on the other hand, included sustainability in their policy, as was also mentioned in the interviews with participant 5. The ambition is “to help tenants find a suitable home and to build sustainable housing in sustainable neighborhoods” (Alliantie, 2020, p. 5). Meanwhile, the focus of the yearly report of De Key is given to the method of rent increase and affordability. This points out the differences between corporations are identified in both the yearly reports and the interviews.
15 Figure 4, Map of property of SHCs in Amsterdam. Retrieved from Gemeente Amsterdam (2020b).
4.2 Formal responsibilities
This section described results concerning political considerations, including legitimacy and accountability. Then, juridical considerations’ results are presented with rule of law and fairness. This is followed by economic considerations, which includes efficiency and securing climate adaptation action.
Political considerations: Legitimacy
Mees (2014) defines legitimacy as the idea that all stakeholders are included and that the policy concerning climate adaptation is accepted by all stakeholders. Therefore, this section focusses on terms or words mentioned in interviews and documents that indicate whether social housing corporations see themselves as a legitimate stakeholder or as an authority in the field and whether they accept adaptation policy.
To investigate whether SHCs assess themselves as authorities in the field, their experience and self-assigned responsibility is researched. The results show that, according to most interviewees, climate adaptation is a new topic, to the extent that the word ‘climate adaptation’ is relatively unknown. Participant 3 states “The word does not have a strong appeal, so if you
16 cut it up into themes, such as gardens, heat, drought […] this will create more appeal. They have experience in these themes.” (appendix VI, p. 20). The consequence of its novelty is that many interviewees mention the question on who is responsible for the implementation of climate adaptation measures. This is partly due to the collective aspect of the issue, as public and private property are involved in the process of climate adaptation (participant 3). Additionally, no single party can be identified as the cause of increased extreme weather and therefore this task requires collective operation. In other words, SHCs are still in an early stage of knowledge acquisition and are searching for their role in the climate adaptation process. Another consequence of the unfamiliarity is that climate adaptation receives little attention compared to other sustainability challenges and regular policies. Interviewees expressed to have other priorities above climate adaptations, as the position paper by Aedes (2020) states that the main task of housing corporations is to provide affordable housing. They additionally face challenges such as new housing developments, a housing shortage and affordability (participant 8). Other priorities might be the energy transition, circularity, goals for CO2 neutrality or policies for starters (participant 1; participant 5; participant 7). Additionally, participant 6 states that corporations might have the idea that climate adaptation is not an acute problem. Participant 3 added that corporations see climate adaptation as “something extra” or not part of the essential procedures (appendix VI, p. 28). Additionally, participant 10 explained that “unknown is unloved”, meaning that because it is a novelty, climate adaptation is seen as something outside corporations’ scope (appendix VI, p. 77). The general idea of responsibility of SHC is well summarized by participant 3, as she states that the role SHCs play is limited when it comes to water management and heat, and both roles are still new and vague.
The second question is whether SHCs accept climate adaptation regulation. Results indicate that this depends on multiple variables. First, their acceptance depends on their perceptions of necessity. For example, participant 12 noted that the municipality of Amsterdam made a map indicating locations that experience problems with water drainage. She indicates that corporations will first investigate whether their property is located in such areas before investing. Another factor is the cooperation and communication about the regulation. In 2021 the new rainwater regulation was signed, which obligates new housing to retain a substantial amount of water. On the procedure of executing this regulation, participant 7 states “[t]he criticism about this regulation is that it is on top of the cooperation agreements […]. If you put this on top of it, then we are no longer able to pay for it. That is not included in the negotiation.” (appendix VI, p. 56). Concluding, SHCs see climate adaptation as a novelty, meaning that they
17 lack experience. This shows that they are not an authority in the field. Besides, the acceptance of climate adaptation regulation by SHCs is dependent on the context.
Political considerations: Accountability
Considerations concerning accountability are about ensuring that SHCs are to be held accountable by those affected by their policy (Mees, 2014). In this section, terms about transparency, sharing responsibilities, and cooperation are investigated.
Tenants are an important group that is affected by SHCs policy, especially because SHCs’ main goal is to provide affordable housing. There are cases in which tenants would like to start a climate adaptation project, such as green roofs or rain barrels. Corporations are willing to cooperate, as for example participant 8 from Eigen Haard states that the SHC tries to facilitate these projects when possible. However, according to participant 13, some of these initiatives get rejected by Rochdale, because of lack of experience with the projects or because too many individuals start such initiatives. Participant 12 adds that “a corporation is foremostly doing its own tasks […] in the case that a tenants’ initiative interferes, that means that corporation has to adapt. And must be the motivation of the corporation to pick up the initiative.” (appendix VI, p. 87). Participant 11 also states that the tenants’ organization Arcade sends unsolicited advice concerning sustainability, yet they are “completely ignored” by the SHC (appendix VI, p. 83). This might result in the loss of the energy and motivation of tenants to aid in climate adaptation. To contrast this, participant 12 indicates that there is a trend in which SHCs are more proactive in the areas of their property. This might be an indicator that corporations have acknowledged this barrier and have started to work on it.
The second party which cooperates closely with SHCs is the municipality of Amsterdam. Participant 13 indicates that “[t]he cooperation with the municipality is essential for corporations. We are very dependent on each other.” (appendix VI, p. 95). An important factor for this cooperation is whether the ambitions of SHCs are in line with those of the municipality. The Climate Adaptation Strategy report points to strategies to increase climate adaptation action namely cooperation and involvement, stimulation and support for initiatives, knowledge sharing and communication (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2020a; participant 14). These are akin to those mentioned by interviewees. Additionally, participant 5 indicates that aspirations of De Alliantie are analogous to those of the municipality. However, participant 6 and participant 7 both shared concerns about the achievability of the ambitions of the municipality. This might
18 indicate that the municipality and social housing corporations have varying expectations concerning climate adaptation.
Even if ambitions are clear and similar, the question remains ‘who is responsible for what?’ According to participant 4, corporations might see climate adaptation as a responsibility of the government. Moreover, participant 13 from SHC Rochdale shares concern about impact SHCs can make in climate adaptation. She states that other organizations related to the municipality might play a larger role. Meanwhile, SHCs are seen by the government as the first party to address in housing innovations, as they own large amount of property (participant 8). The lack of division of responsibilities can be addressed at the performance agreements. This is where of the arrangements on tasks and responsibilities between municipalities and SHCs are established (participant 9). According to participant 10, climate adaptation is shortly mentioned in the latest performance agreements. However, not all parties have faith in the performance agreements. Participant 6 states that “the performance agreements are almost always a kind of one-way street, in which 80-90% of the arrangements is one that needs to be executed by the corporation. And 10-20% of the arrangements is one that requires the municipality to do something.” (appendix VI, p. 50). Participant 4 adds that these arrangements do not include much enthusiasm but are more of a task that needs to be done. In conclusion, accountability of SHCs can be investigated by researching the cooperation with tenants and the municipality. Cooperation with the municipality points to a lack of division of responsibilities. Additionally, the accountability towards tenants indicates that facilitating tenants’ initiatives might be a point of attention.
Juridical considerations: Rule of law
Considerations about the rule of law revolve around national regulations that determine responsibilities for SHCs in the climate adaptation process (Mees, 2014). Therefore, the current and future regulations mentioned in the interviews are investigated.
The most prominent law that describes SHCs’ responsibilities is the “woningwet”, or the housing law (participant 2). This law sets rules concerning the end goal of investments by housing corporations and SHCs may only finance projects that benefit the tenant. According to participant 2, ‘[t]his is problematic for the investments that SHCs want to implement on a large scale” (appendix VI, p. 10). According to participant 5 the law will become more lenient, yet it does not allow for large changes. Besides the housing law, several building requirements
19 are mentioned during the interviews, such as NTA 8800, TO Juli and the BENG norms (participant 2). These requirements increase the complexity and expenses of the building process for corporations, and might affect the affordability of housing (Ymere, 2019). Participant 13 stated that meeting all standards is difficult. She states that according to this investigation some corporations will go bankrupt if they would comply to all regulations within the given timeframe. This might be because, as participant 6 explains, the number of policy targets and goals increase and the houses are becoming more expensive, yet the earning potential remains the same.
Additionally, new regulations might be coming due to a lawsuit concerning the SHC Ymere. During recent heat waves, some tenants found their home unhabitable due to heat and filed a lawsuit against the SHC (participant 10). This heat contraption might be caused by newly build houses that are well isolated, leading to high indoor temperatures during hot summers (participant 1). According to participant 5, the judge stated that the tenant and corporation must cooperate in finding a solution for the heat problem. Furthermore, the judge also stated that the corporation should have taken more responsibility. This statement has made an impact on the corporations’ sector, according to participant 3. She indicated that corporations start to consider their juridical role in this process because of the lawsuit. Participant 9, working for tenants’ organization Woonbond, stated that if more people might find themselves in similar situations as those who files a successful lawsuit, more lawsuits might follow. These lawsuits may lead to the establishment of new laws and requirements.
Regulation might lead to discomfort; however, it might also be the solution. According to the position paper by Aedes, some regulations for SHCs are hampering the transition towards sustainable housing. By adjusting these regulations, SHCs are given the opportunity to invest in livability and sustainability (Aedes, 2018). Moreover, participant 12 indicates that if one wishes to make sure that houses are well prepared for warm and water excessive periods, she thinks it should be part of regulation. Therefore, adjusting hampering regulation and establishing fitting rules for climate adaptation might increase climate adaptation action. To conclude, current regulation might form a barrier for implementing climate adaptation. Additional regulation might follow due to court cases started by tenants. Regulation might however also form a solution for increasing climate adaptation by stimulation adaptation action.
20 Juridical considerations: Fairness
Considerations about fairness involve the establishment of a fair distribution of costs and benefits over society (Mees, 2014). In this section, indicators about the ability of social housing corporations to distribute the benefits and burdens equally are investigated.
Climate adaptation is a collective issue, according to participant 12, and this may result in uneven cost and benefit balances. Participant 8 states that if a residence disconnects its rainwater pipe from the sewage system, this will benefit the water managing organization. However, neither the tenants nor the SHCs receive any benefit from this. Participant 6 calls this a split incentive. He explains that “[This regulation] means that one is no longer allowed to discharge into the sewage system, only at a certain amount. That means that as owner you will have to make costs […] to realize this. That is fine, if that would be accompanied with a decrease of my sewage tax, yet I still pay the same amount of sewage tax […].” (appendix VI, p. 49). The representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Royal Relationships (MBZK) stated that there are contradicting stimulations, as one party is demanded to invest while the other organizations benefit from this. Important to state is that the benefits of climate adaptation to the tenants are not as well-defined compared to other sustainability measures (participant 9). Participant 8 agrees by saying that the energy transition is important to tenants because it allows the corporation to bring down their energy bill. Also, circularity benefits the corporation, yet benefits for climate adaptation are unclear.
Also the costs of development are a concern. According to participant 8 the development costs of innovations are, especially in early stages, relatively high. As corporations’ income is derived from tenants with a low income, this might be problematic, according to participant 8. She states that “it is not fair to give those high startup costs to social housing corporations” (appendix VI, p. 65). In this case people with the lowest income are paying for new innovations, while the costs are decreasing in the future as more people use the product. The position paper by Aedes agrees, as it states that the costs for sustainable social housing must not disproportionately fall on the shoulders of the tenants (Aedes, 2018). To summarize, costs and benefits are distributed unevenly in climate adaptation, which is observed by different interviewees. Some of these costs and benefits seem to be ambiguous and vague. Additionally, the development costs are high in early stages and seem to fall on the tenants with low income.
21 Efficiency considerations are about the ability of an actor to accurately allocate scarce resources, often done with market mechanism (Mees, 2014). Here the expertise of SHCs in distributing limited resources and their innovative capacity is researched.
Climate adaptation is considered a new topic, which results in knowledge deficiencies. The result is that many organizations are in the information gathering phase. Corporations are still unsure about the risks concerning heat stress, droughts and water excesses (participant 5; participant 8; participant 13). In other words, SHCs seem to be far from experts when it comes to climate adaptation measures. Besides knowledge, the financial and organizational capacity also has its limits (participant 2; participant 13). SHCs have three main sources of income, namely rent, the sale of houses and loans. With these income sources the SHCs invest in, among other expenditures, new construction projects, the renovation processes of their assets and the ‘verhuurdersheffing’ or landlord levy. This tax contains three to four months of rent income (participant 8). This levy has financial consequences, as SHC are restricted in their expenditure for novel initiatives, affordability and new development projects (participant 2; participant 3). Important to note is that, because they have no profit motive, SHCs possess little financial reserves for new initiatives (participant 2).
This lack of financial reserves affects policy, as participant 11 states that De Key has reduced its ambitions in sustainability, mainly because of financial reasons. Participant 3 indicates that sometimes climate adaptation measures are less expensive if implemented by corporations, so there is an incentive to support SHCs financially. Participant 7 agrees that more financial resources will result in sustainable property at a faster rate and offered an idea of putting tax on the amount of pressure a house puts on the environment instead of its property value. Additionally, multiple interviewees state that financial disincentives, uneven distribution of costs and benefits and uncertainty concerning profitability were reasons not to invest in climate adaptation measures (appendix I). These are important aspects, as a payback model is required to invest in the climate adaptation measure in the first place (participant 7; participant 5). In conclusion, removing the contradicting incentives is important solution to the barrier of limited financial capacity. Besides, SHCs are not an expert in climate adaptations and lack sufficient knowledge, financial and organizational capacity to efficiently distribute scarce resources concerning climate adaptation.
22 Securing climate adaptation is about the effectiveness in the execution of climate adaptation measures, which is not hindered by market failures or other barriers (Mees, 2014). Here the effectiveness of SHCs in realizing climate adaptation measures is investigated.
First, results from a series of mini surveys indicate that a lack of knowledge destabilizes the ability of a SHC to execute climate adaptation. Especially knowledge about climate adaptation on the level of gardens, green roofs and heat stress is lacking (Boerbooms, n.d. b, c & d). Only 11% of surveyed employees from housing corporations assesses that they have sufficient knowledge to address heat in houses (Boerbooms, n.d.b). The maintenance of gardens is also a point of attention, as only 17% of surveyed people indicates their corporation has policy for gardens in the living environment, while gardens have a great potential in water storage (Boerbooms, n.d.c). Lastly, 36% of respondents state that their corporations have sufficient knowledge about green roofs (Boerbooms, n.d.d). In other words, still a lot of knowledge is necessary, for both corporations as well as for tenants (participant 13; participant 10).
Additionally, an important indicator for regular execution of climate adaptation measures is that this is integrated into policy. Only participant 5 states that her corporation is at this stage. She states that ‘we are one of the few that directly created a program for it and that implements [the energy transition, circularity and climate adaptation] in our company’ (appendix VI, p. 34). Participant 5 stated that their main motivation to experiment with climate adaptive measures is that the corporation thinks it is valuable to gain experience and investigate the usefulness of climate adaptation projects. This will result in better development of technology and creates opportunities for better decision making.
For other housing associations such motivations might not be sufficient as sometimes projects are cancelled at the very final stage. Participant 14 states that Groene Huisvesters indicated that “there are good intentions, however at the final decision, to complete the business case, [climate adaptation measures] are cancelled.” (appendix VI, p. 101). Additionally, climate adaptation initiatives from tenants are not always executed, as previously stated by participant 14, and therefore, the security of climate adaptation actions is not guaranteed. To summarize, there are knowledge gaps and high levels of uncertainty concerning climate adaptation. This, in combination with a lack of integration of climate adaptation into policy and a pattern of cancelling climate adaptation measures, leads to a lack of security in climate adaptation action.
23
4.3 Moral responsibilities
Vulnerability based arguments
Vulnerability based arguments concern ideas of protecting relevant actors. The interviews indicate that corporations have the ambition to protect vulnerable people from heat stress. An increase in complaints might raise the attention of the municipality, according to participant 13. This eventually leads to more attention from SHCs (participant 13). Especially because of the increasing hot summers and changing weather patterns, SHCs are considering climate adaptation strategies. Besides, socially isolated groups also receive special attention, as participant 4 states that “people who are disabled, they should not take the stairs. It is better that they live on the base floor. These people might really want to, but are unable to, maintain their garden. Then people with an interest in gardening are identified and they are asked if they want to work in the garden.” (appendix VI, p. 30). She states that these gardens have been part of climate adaptation measures, with the incentive to increase the social cohesion in the neighborhood. Such initiatives are also mentioned in the yearly report of Eigen Haard.
Another interesting finding is that some SHCs indicated they value the protection of the environment. According to participant 3, corporations think biodiversity is striking and “they think it is an important topic.” (appendix VI, p. 20). For example, three out of the four corporations that were interviewed stated that they found biodiversity an important factor in implementing climate adaptation strategies (participant 5; participant 7; participant 8). Biodiversity was also mentioned in the yearly reports of 2019 of Alliantie and Stadgenoot. In other words, interviews indicate that SHCs have the incentive to protect their tenants and they value the protection of biodiversity.
System based arguments
System based arguments concern the SHCs responsibilities, tasks and duties they identify themselves in order to protect certain systems. The first example is the protection of the system in which they gain income via rent. Tenants are only able to live in a property if it is habitable and damage by climate change might harm this system (participant 10). An example is water damage or foundational damage due to extreme heavy rainfalls, which floods basements. Therefore, to prevent or limit damage from climate change and their accompanying costs is an
24 important factor for corporations to employ climate adaptation measures (participant 14; appendix I).
Besides protecting their property, corporations indicated that they aim at protecting the low-rent system. This is done by planning maintenance intervals strategically and ensure low monthly costs for tenants (participant 6). They tend to take the task of providing affordable housing for people who cannot find their home on the market seriously, as participant 2 stated that “this had been the goal of SHCs for 100 years.” (appendix VI, p. 13). Protecting the low rents also means that new expenses, such as climate adaptation measures, are critically analyzed before implementation. For example, the spokesperson of Eigen Haard states that “we are intrinsically motivated to do a lot concerning sustainability, however our task is to facilitate housing for people with the lowest income” (appendix VI, p. 68). Overall, SHCs seem willing to think about sustainability, as long as the system of low rent is preserved.
Lastly, interviewees indicate that they see a guarantee of a healthy living environment as their task, which is a responsibility towards their tenants. Participant 2 indicated that corporations wish to create a comfortable living environment and that this is an incentives to think about climate adaptation. She adds that there are boundaries to the extent in which SHCs will go to create this environment. Participant 4 indicates that corporations aim at preventing health related damage, such as heat stress. Other corporations might want to enhance the quality of the living environment. For example, participant 7 and participant 5 both stated that their SHC is using climate adaptation projects to cool their property. Additionally, half of all interviewees mentioned livability as a motivation for climate adaptation measures. The underlying reasons vary, from a healthier and a clean living environments, to prevention of unlivable homes that are overheated or flooded. In conclusion, social housing corporations aim to keep three systems in place. These are the protection of property as it generates income, the system of low rent and the responsibility of ensuring a comfortable living environment for tenants. A table with results for all considerations for attaining responsibilities is found in appendix V.
4.4 Possible interventions
In addition to the questions concerning the considerations that are important for SHCs, interviewees responded to what interventions can be established to accelerate the process of climate adaptation in SHCs’ policy. Three main suggestions are given by participants. First,
25 the financial disincentives should be tackled. Three participants mentioned a form of the abolishment of the tenants’ levy to make room for investments, such as climate adaptation projects (Participant 6, participant 8 and participant 3). Participant 3 states that Groene Huisvesters is proponent of the abolishment under the condition that this budget would be spend on climate adaptation and investments alike. She also states that there is a research called “Opgave en Financiële Middelen”, which studies the tenants levy and its consequences for SHCs, according to participant 3 (appendix VI, p. 26). So, the tenants’ levy might be adjusted in de future. Participant 7 offered an idea of putting tax on the amount of pressure a house puts on the environment, instead of its property value.
A second intervention is the increase of knowledge dispersion and cooperation between SHCs, tenants and the municipality. Interviewees from Aedes, Groene Huisvesters, Samen Klimaatbestendig, the Ministry (MBZK) and Rainproof indicated that they are collecting and dispersing knowledge about successful climate adaptation projects, so the first steps have been taken. Closer cooperation with tenants would enable tenants to unite and share knowledge, which increases the chances of successful tenant initiatives.
The last intervention is regulation, which includes the adjustment of existing regulations to facilitate climate adaptation and the increase of regulation to prevent climate adaptation from being cancelled at the very last moment (participant 13). An example of effective regulation is the performance agreement in the municipality of Zwolle. SHCs, tenants’ organizations, residents and businesses are included in this project to exchange information and the Municipality of Zwolle takes a leading role (Boerbooms & Verhaeghe, 2020). This results in many initiatives, such as façade gardens, climate adaptative development projects, the detachment of rainwater collection to the sewage system and a decrease in heat stress. In conclusion, interviewees indicate that the eradication of financial disincentives, feasible regulation and increased knowledge, awareness and cooperation would aid SHCs in implementing climate adaptation measures into their policy.
26
5. Discussion
This section describes the validity of the research. This is then followed by an interpretation of the results, the implications and recommendations for future research.
The validity of this research concerns its limitations, validity of the sources, the effectiveness of the chosen indicators and the ability to generalize the conclusions. First, limitations include various factors such as time frame and circumstances. This is a bachelor thesis of 3 months, which implies that limited time and financial capacity is available for this research. Also, due to Covid-19, interviews are conducted by phone, meaning that physical reactions and other possibly useful information is lost. The second step is the validity of the sources, which can be assessed by their origin and analysis. The interviews and documents are exclusively primary data. This means that the sources are produced from a certain viewpoint and are not objective. Yet, many sources from different perspectives were used. As for the chosen indicators in the operationalization, the considerations for assigning certain responsibilities indicate which factors influence decision making in climate adaptation. Main barriers and motivations for implementing climate adaptation were successfully identified and therefore I believe the right indicators are researched. Fourth, the conclusions of this research might be generalized to other Dutch cities as SHCs in the Netherlands share a similar organizational history (Elzen, 2013). However, the actors and policy specifically focused Amsterdam should be taken into account. This section interprets the results of this research. What becomes clear from the results is that the divisions of responsibilities as done in UCG is not very well established in this case. So far, the division of responsibilities in climate adaptation does not seem to be established by fairness based considerations as Adger et al. (2017) suggested, but more on practical assumptions. For example, as mentioned in the interviews, the municipality assigns SHCs responsibilities, as they would be able to widely implement climate adaptation due to their large amounts of property. Yet, due to their lack of experience and insufficient financial capacity, SHCs might not be considered as a fit organization to execute these measures. In other words, a shift from practical considerations to a more fairness based discussion would aid in dividing responsibility more evenly. This would allow for a fair division of responsibilities amongst all actors that are capable of implementing climate adaptation measures. Additionally, the lack of a just division hampers the climate adaptation process, as interviewees indicated that SHCs have other priorities. This is in line with Runhaar et al. (2012), who stated the absence of a clear division in responsibilities is crippling the climate adaptation process. Also, most considerations for
27 formal and moral responsibility were mentioned with similar words as described in the theoretical framework and the operationalization. This indicates that the theoretical framework is well suited for this research.
The results also indicate that there are various influencing factors from different responsibilities. The most frequently mentioned were financial, regulatory and knowledge related factors. Also, livability is an important factor, as this was mentioned by seven out of fourteen the interviewees. An interesting finding is the uneven distribution of costs and benefits and a possible explanations for this can be found in the literature. As mentioned, Graham et al. (2015) stated that the consequences of climate change, such as heat stress and increased natural hazards, are dispersed unevenly in society. Another important results is that SHCs are inherently different in structure, priorities and perspectives on climate adaptation. This can be explained by Wagner et al. (2019) who stated that perceptions of climate adaptation are dependent on an organizations’ background and history. Additionally, in the theoretical framework, considerations from social movements, were displayed as exaggerated ideas that might be found in considerations by SHCs. Some answers indicated social inclusion and enhancement of social cohesion. Also, keeping the rent low is important for low-income groups and is based on fairness principles. However, even though some hints of fairness based principles are found in interviewees’ answers, one can conclude that principles such as environmental justice are not part of SHCs considerations and tasks that they assign to themselves.
The consequence of this research is that stakeholders have more insight in the process of climate adaptation in Amsterdam. Additionally, important underlying factors in decision-making are presented, such as the uneven dispersal of costs and benefits of climate adaptation measures which hampers the process of decision making. If the current situation is not adjusted, this might have severe implications for the future. For example, if the costs and benefits are still ill distributed, SHCs and their tenants might not feel the urge to act in climate adaptation, which may lead to climate related damage.
For the implications of this research, the interviewees were able to formulate various interventions that aid the climate adaptation process for SHCs. These might aid NGOs that work on information collection and dispersion, such as Samen Klimaatbestendig and Groene Huisvesters. Also, the municipality might be enlightened about specific interventions that they might facilitate. Lastly, these interventions might be discussed in relevant policy making
28 processes, such as the performance agreements. In appendix IV an infographic displays these interventions, which is sent to the interviewees.
6. Conclusion
This research investigated the factors influencing decision making by social housing corporations in Amsterdam in including or excluding climate adaptation measures from their policy. This is done by interviewing 14 stakeholders and conducting a document analysis. Thematic coding is used to identify factors that are relevant in decision making. A responsibility framework is used to identify key terms that served as indicators for different factors. The results indicate that factors that influence decision making are numerous and heterogenous. To answer the first sub-question, factors in attaining formal responsibilities include the novelty of climate adaptation, leading to SHCs still exploring their role in the process. Cooperation with tenants and local authorities is seen as relevant by SHCs and this can be improved. Accumulations of regulations and building requirements lead to increased building costs. This depletes the financial capacity of SHCs. Other financial insecurities arise when costs and benefits are spread unevenly and the profitability of the measures is uncertain. High innovation costs might fall on low income tenants, which would be problematic according to interviewees. Due to a lack of experience with climate adaptation SHCs do not see themselves as an authority in the field and these projects are sometimes cancelled due to various reasons, such as lack of imbedded policy or knowledge.
As for the second sub-question, factors influencing moral responsibilities are various. First, SHCs interviewees indicate that biodiversity is an important factor. Also, protecting vulnerable people by increasing social cohesion through climate adaptation measures is mentioned in interviews research. Besides, SHCs aim at keeping three systems in place. The first concerns maintaining an affordable rent to protect low incomes. Additionally, SHCs wish to create a healthy and comfortable living environment. Lastly, they want to guarantee the maintenance of their property which can be damaged by climate change impacts if no climate adaptation measures are installed. These are the main considerations for social housing corporations to get involved with or reject climate adaptation policy. Possible ways to increase their involvement might be the alteration of hindering regulation, a stimulation of financial resources and an increase in knowledge and cooperation.
29 For future research, three main investigations are recommended. A major topic for future research to add to current literature on the matter is the cooperation between SHCs and municipalities in relation to climate adaptation. This can include an investigation on what policy interventions can be used to increase SHCs activity in climate adaptation. Second, a serious investigation in the costs and benefits distribution of climate adaptation measures would aid institutions to put climate adaptation higher on stakeholders’ agendas. The final recommendation includes the involvement of tenants. Participant 13 pointed out that tenants’ associations are not able to represent all tenants. This might be due to various cultural, ethnographic or class-based reasons. To gain the insight of the tenants’ perspective, tenants outside of the tenants’ associations should be included in the research.
30
7. Bibliography
Adger, W. N., Butler, C., & Walker-Springett, K. (2017). Moral reasoning in adaptation to climate change. Environmental Politics, 26(3), 371-390.
Aedes. (2018, May). Position paper
klimaatakkoord. https://dkvwg750av2j6.cloudfront.net/m/7343b3123192fe05/original/Aedes-Position-paper-Klimaatakkoord-mei-2018.pdf
AFWC. (n.d.). De woningmarkt en het corporatiebezit. Retrieved from:
https://www.afwc.nl/databank/themas/de-woningmarkt-en-het-corporatiebezit
Anguelovski, I., & Carmin, J. (2011). Something borrowed, everything new: innovation and institutionalization in urban climate governance. Current opinion in environmental
sustainability, 3(3), 169-175.
Boerbooms, M. (n.d.a). Fact sheet regelingen voor groen voor investeringen in duurzaamheid en groen wonen voor woningcorporaties in 2021.
https://groenehuisvesters.nl/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Financie%CC%88le-regelingen-1.pdf
Boerbooms, M. (n.d.b). Hittestress: corporaties hebben behoefte aan kennis en handvaten – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en
klimaatadaptatie. Commissioned by Groene Huisvesters, Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijkrelaties and Samen
Klimaatbestendig. https://www.dropbox.com/s/yuo7as8au08kcmr/Enquete_Hittestress_03.pd
f?dl=0
Boerbooms, M. (n.d.c). Tuinen: corporaties hebben veel kansen om tuinen te vergroenen – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en
klimaatadaptatie. Commissioned by Groene Huisvesters, Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijkrelaties and Samen
Klimaatbestendig. https://www.dropbox.com/s/dduqels1f9b7ngo/Enquete_Tuinen.pdf?dl=0 Boerbooms, M. (n.d.d). Blauwgroene daken: corporaties doen eerste ervaringen op – uit de reeks van mini-enquêtes Corporaties en
klimaatadaptatie. Commissioned by Groene Huisvesters, Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijkrelaties and Samen
Klimaatbestendig. https://www.dropbox.com/s/g2uluogpmthb9dh/Enquete_Blauwgroene_Da ken.pdf?dl=0
31 Boerbooms & Verhaeghe. 2020. Prestatieafspraak Klimaatadaptatie. Retrieved from:
https://groenehuisvesters.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Prestatieafspraak-klimaatadaptatie.pdf
Boezeman, D., & de Vries, T. (2019). Climate proofing social housing in the Netherlands: toward mainstreaming?. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(8), 1446-1464.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative
research journal.
Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2014). Thematic analysis. In Encyclopedia of critical psychology (pp. 1947-1952). Springer, New York, NY.
Elsinga, M., & Wassenberg, F. (2014). Social housing in the Netherlands. Social housing in
Europe, 75, 25-40.
Elzen, W. V. D. (2013). The future role of the Dutch housing corporations. Master thesis for the faculty of management sciences at the Radboud University Nijmegen.
Gemeente Amsterdam. (2020a). Strategie Klimaatadaptatie Amsterdam. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/Asus/Downloads/strategie_klimaatadaptie_amsterdam.pdf
Gemeente Amsterdam. (2020b). Woningcorporatiebezit 2020 Metropoolregio Amsterdam. Retrieved from https://maps.amsterdam.nl/afwc_2020/?LANG=nl
Geneletti, D., & Zardo, L. (2016). Ecosystem-based adaptation in cities: An analysis of European urban climate adaptation plans. Land use policy, 50, 38-47.
Graham, S., Barnett, J., Fincher, R., Mortreux, C., & Hurlimann, A. (2015). Towards fair local outcomes in adaptation to sea-level rise. Climatic Change, 130(3), 411-424.
Lemasson-Théobald, A (2019). Retrieved from https://unsplash.com/photos/0H-3a5UDW9E
Mees, H. (2014). Responsible climate change adaptation: Exploring, analysing and evaluating
public and private responsibilities for urban adaptation to climate change (Doctoral
32
Mees, H. (2017). Local governments in the driving seat? A comparative analysis of public and private responsibilities for adaptation to climate change in European and North-American cities. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(4), 374-390.
Mees, H. L., Driessen, P. P., & Runhaar, H. A. (2015). " Cool" governance of a" hot" climate issue: public and private responsibilities for the protection of vulnerable citizens against extreme heat. Regional Environmental Change, 15(6), 1065-1079
Mees, H. L., Driessen, P. P., & Runhaar, H. A. (2012). Exploring the scope of public and private responsibilities for climate adaptation. Journal of Environmental Policy &
Planning, 14(3), 305-330.
Molenveld, A., van Buuren, A., & Ellen, G. J. (2020). Governance of climate adaptation, which mode? An exploration of stakeholder viewpoints on how to organize adaptation. Climatic
Change, 162(2), 233-254.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). ‘Deduction’ vs. ‘Induction’ vs. ‘Abduction’. Retrieved from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/deduction-vs-induction-vs-abduction
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions, ideology, and economic performance. Cato J., 11, 477.
Patten, M. L., & Newhart, M. (2017). Understanding research methods: An overview of the essentials.
Roders, M., & Straub, A. (2015). Assessment of the likelihood of implementation strategies for climate change adaptation measures in Dutch social housing. Building and Environment, 83, 168-176.
Runhaar, H., Mees, H., Wardekker, A., van der Sluijs, J., & Driessen, P. P. (2012). Adaptation to climate change-related risks in Dutch urban areas: stimuli and barriers. Regional
Environmental Change, 12(4), 777-790.
Shi, L., Chu, E., Anguelovski, I., Aylett, A., Debats, J., Goh, K., ... & VanDeveer, S. D. (2016). Roadmap towards justice in urban climate adaptation research. Nature Climate Change, 6(2), 131-137.
Tennekes, J., Driessen, P. P., Van Rijswick, H. F., & Van Bree, L. (2014). Out of the comfort zone: institutional context and the scope for legitimate climate adaptation policy. Journal of
