Controlling the goods : how Amsterdam controls its deteriorating retail market and how the public is involved

(1)

Controlling the goods

Student name: Martijn Backx Student number: 11776862

Student advisor: Dhr. Dr. Jochem de Vries Second reader: Prof. Dr. Maria Kaika University of Amsterdam

Master Urban and Regional Planning

Department of Geography, Planning and International Development Studies June 11, 2019

How Amsterdam controls its deteriorating

retail market and how the public is involved

(2)

2

Colofon

Martijn Backx 11776862

martijn.backx@student.uva.nl Urban & Regional Planning

Universiteit van Amsterdam Graduate School of Social Sciences

Faculteit der Maatschappij-en Gedragswetenschappen

Department of Human Geography, Planning and International Development Studies Nieuwe Achtergracht 166 1018 WV Amsterdam

(3)

3

Acknowledgments

This master’s thesis is done as part of the graduation for the Urban & Regional Planning master at the University of Amsterdam. After six years of studying in the field of planning, this thesis is the provisional end of my academic career. I could not have done this without the help of my supervisor Dhr. Dr. Jochem de Vries. His feedback during the process of writing this thesis has helped me a lot. I also want to thank all the people who took the time to let me interview them. Of course also thanks to all the people who filled out the questionnaire. Also thanks to my second reader Prof. Dr. Maria Kaika, for making sure this thesis is correctly examined.

(4)

4

“Like all global cities, the city of Amsterdam is popular. Economic

prosperity, growing population, immense tourist interest. The

success also has a downside.”

Jos Gadet, 2016

Abstract

Mass tourism in Amsterdam is causing a monoculture of shops in some neighbourhoods in the center. To stop the decrease of shop diversity, the municipality of Amsterdam released a zoning plan to ban all new tourist shops. This thesis aims to find a relation between the planning process of the zoning plan and the control of collective goods. The control of collective goods is analyzed by looking at two different perspectives: the municipality and the residents. This is researched by a public debate analysis, expert interviews and a questionnaire. The process of the zoning plan turned out to be a problem-based and top-down plan and almost no form of public involvement was used for the plan. This made the zoning plan effective in what it was supposed to do: stop the further decrease of shop diversity. To stop this decrease, the municipality had to intervene in the market, which it did. The resident perspective is mostly negative and they are sceptical about the municipal plans. A common complaint is that the municipality is often too late with their plans. This is a potential cause of the problem-based plan. The municipality sees a problem in the city and makes a plan to solve it. This way of working lacks vision and is a reason why the problem became difficult to address in the first place. The municipality did well in seeing the retail mix as a collective good and knew it had to intervene in the market to keep control of it. However, residents argue that it is already too late to do something about it, and that the municipality has to come with more rigorous plans. Amsterdam might be a victim of its own success. A lack of vision and a hunger for more tourism has cost that the retail mix in the center of Amsterdam became unbalanced, and it is especially in the short term, almost impossible to restore.

(5)

5

1. Introduction

Over the last few years, there has been a significant growth in tourism in the Netherlands. In 2017 the number of tourists grew by 9 percent to 42 million tourists (CBS, 2018). Amsterdam is the most popular destination in the Netherlands, with a share of 37 percent of all tourists (Groenendijk, 2018). For every resident of Amsterdam there are 10 hotel guests over the year. According to research of NBTC (Couzy, 2018) the amount of tourists in the Netherlands will grow by about 50 percent over the next years, from 42 million in 2017 to 60 million in 2030. This will have a significant impact on the city of Amsterdam, especially in the center. Tourist expert Stephen Hodes (Goenendijk, 2018) said: “If we do not intervene now, Amsterdam will become

unliveable.”

The tourist industry is worth 4 percent of the GDP, so the rest of the Netherlands will possibly be happy about the growth of tourism. For Amsterdam, it will be too much if no measures will be taken. The city is slowly becoming impassable and unaffordable (Hodes, 2018). The societal problem of this research is the growth of tourists shops and the effects that this has on residents. Kreag (2001) describes multiple negative impacts of tourism, and one them is that residents can experience a sense of exclusion and alienation over development and planning concerns. Residents of Amsterdam may experience a sense of exclusion from all the new tourist shops that Amsterdam has gotten over the years. According to the municipality of Amsterdam, the retail mix in the center is off balance, and there is a feeling that Amsterdam is not for the locals anymore (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018a). Gemeente Amsterdam describes the problem as the following:

"As a result of the growing popularity of Amsterdam among tourists and day-trippers, the typical diversity in the range of shops and facilities available is decreasing and a one-sided supply of tourist facilities and issues aimed at rapid consumption is emerging"

(translated from Dutch, Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018a)

In the properties that are zoned as retail, more and more shops appear that are solely aimed at tourists. The result is a deterioration of the diversity of shops (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018a). The municipality of Amsterdam agrees that mass tourism has negative implications on the residents of Amsterdam. They see the urgency to make new plans and regulations to deal with these negative effects. To cope with the deterioration of shops, the municipality has made the zoning plan: Winkeldiversiteit centrum (translates to ‘shop diversity center’). With this zoning plan, the municipality blocks all new tourist shops in the city center. Over the past year, more than 30 companies have found out that they may be in violation of the new rules. The municipality let 22 of them stay, some companies received a warning letter, and some of them immediately received an administrative enforcement order. This means that they have to adjust or discontinue their business operations (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018a).

This thesis is not only about how the zoning plan deals with the deterioration of shop diversity, but it is also about how/if the planning process influenced the creation of collective goods. The question for this thesis is to what extent the making of the zoning plan was a collaborative process and what implications this may have had on the creation of a balanced retail mix, which in this thesis is seen as a collective good. This is also seen as the scientific value of this thesis. Collective goods as ‘Balancing interests’ reflects the influence of collaborative planning theory on planning practice over the last decades (Murphy & Fox-Rogers, 2015). In this theory, the planner is

(8)

8 considered a neutral arbitrator of debate and whose role is to come to shared meanings and collective decisions developed by different groups with different interests. This theory shows the connection between collaborative planning and the creation of collective goods, but can the creation/control of collective goods be related to the type of planning process? This relation is still unknown and is researched in this thesis by answering the following research question: What are the differences between the municipality and the residents on how they see a balanced retail mix as a collective good in the Amsterdam zoning plan “Winkeldiversiteit centrum” and how are these differences explained?

At first sight, the planning process of the case study of the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ seems not collaborative, according to a newspaper article of Couzy (2017):

On Thursday morning the locking of the inner city was announced in the government newspaper with which the measure starts immediately. It is a secretly prepared overrun tactic; the city council has agreed upon unanimously behind closed doors. According to councilor Ollongren, this was necessary to prevent tourist retailers from quickly taking new positions in the center before the ban. "Then we would have seen an explosive increase in this type of shops." (translated from Dutch)

According to councilor Ollongren, no decision like the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ has been made anywhere in the world (Couzy, 2017). This is also a reason why this thesis is scientifically relevant. Describing the case study about this one of a kind zoning plan, including the policy-making process, can be relevant for other cities in the world who deal with the same kind of problems.

(9)

9

2. Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework of this thesis consists of two main concepts: the planning process and collective goods. These concepts are chosen because they are essential to understand how successful management of the retail mix in the inner city as a collective good work. In this thesis, the relationship between the planning process and the management of collective goods is researched. To assess the planning process, two main discourses in planning theory are used: rational planning and collaborative planning. As an extra layer to those two theories, problem- and vision-based planning are two concepts that also are used to evaluate the planning process. The theory of collective goods is necessary to understand how the inner city, and in particular the retail mix in the inner city, can be seen as a collective good. Based on the theories described in this chapter, there is assessed whether the retail mix is still a truly collective good in Amsterdam.

2.1 Planning process approaches

2.1.1 Rational planning / Top-down planning

In planning theory there has been a shift from rational planning to collaborative planning. Healey (1996) called this the communicative turn in planning. The rational planning model started from the 1960s and by the 1980s it became a major discourse in planning theory (Innes & Booher, 2014). This model is based on logic and the measurable. According to Banfield (1973) a rational decision is taken when: (a) the decision-maker lists all the opportunities for action open to him; (b) he identifies all the consequences which would follow from adoption of each of the possible actions; and (c) he selects the action which would be followed by the preferred set of consequences. The role of the public would be limited to advising on values and preferences (Innes & Booher, 2014). This is why the rational planning model can is seen as a top-down planning approach. Banfield (1973) described the process of making a rational decision in steps, which assumes that planning is a linear process and has set goals. However, this is not necessarily always the case, there are certain conditions for the rational choice model to work. For example, agreed upon goals and values are one of these, but in reality it is rarely the case (Innes & Booher, 2015). Etzioni (1967) was one of the first who came up with that critique. He also wrote about the rational choice model to be unrealistic. Information about consequences is at best fractional. Decision-makers neither have the assets nor the time to collect the information required for a rational choice.

Over the years the context in which planners work has changed a lot, which has caused changes in the role of the planner. The rational choice model became less effective to use. This is described by different authors like Fischler. As Fischler (2000) states: “…defining a planning problem relies

on much more than data gathering and analysis. It involves theoretical frameworks, belief systems, political structures, and technical capabilities.” When working according to the rational

choice model this was not taken into consideration. Palermo & Ponzini (2010) expand on the argument that planning has become more complex by stating that planning includes not only concrete processes of urban development but also general issues of social guidance. The boundaries between planners and other professionals are starting to disappear. Planners want to do more than just strict planning and non-planners also want to plan (Campbell & Fainstein, 2016). Cambell & Fainstein (2016, p.5) mention the following issue that comes up in planning

(10)

10 debates: “Is planning about means or ends, processes or outcomes, and should it emphasize one

or the other?”. Planning used to focus on the outcome with the rational choice model. It was

assumed that by following the step by step procedure, the best and most desired outcome was ensured. However, after many people criticized the rational choice model, a new paradigm was developed: collaborative planning.

2.1.2 Collaborative planning

Some have declared collaborative planning as the emergence of a new dominant paradigm (Huxley & Yiftachel, 2000). In contrast to rational planning, communicative planning is not a linear process (Healey, 1996). The process involves different stakeholders who not always agree with each other. Communicative planning theory (CPT) emerged in the 80s and 90s as many planners did not agree with the rational choice model. CPT argues that planning takes place through networks and therefore interaction amongst planners is a crucial part in planning (Innes & Booher, 2015). According to Healey (1996) CPT focuses on listening to and learning from all different ‘stories’ that apply. This means that every stakeholder who is related to the plan has a valid opinion and needs to be taken into the process. The communicative turn in planning helps to involve other groups that usually are not involved in the planning process. This theory was the basis for collaborative planning theory. Collaborative practices hold the promise of developing understandings, policies and projects which are infused with a richer understanding of material conditions, values and interests than resort to technical analysis, bureaucratic procedure or ideological struggle on their own could achieve (Healey, 1997).

Just like the rational choice model, CPT also received some criticism. Firstly, Healey herself mentioned two problems in her article (Healey, 1996): 1) Power problem: The set-up and style of CPT are essential. Institutional agencies still have the power to set up planning meetings. They come up with the topic of choice. 2) Civic virtues problem: deliberative planning or CPT needs civic virtues or citizenship. This citizenship is not only about voting rights. CPT needs more, for example skills to organize and taking over tasks. The problem with civic virtues is that it creates an exclusionary effect where only a few people will participate.

Innes & Booher (2015) also described a few critiques of CPT in their paper. Firstly deliberation and inclusion would be inefficient compared to a more standard top-down approach. Secondly, communication is viewed as simply talk without changing anything or anyone. Thirdly, consensus building necessarily involved peer pressure and resulted in lowest common denominator decisions (marginalize weaker groups). At last, Innes & Booher (2015) mentioned that collaboration could end up with the wrong outcomes and have an inappropriate emphasis on the process instead of the outcome. A good example of this critique often comes up with the built of windmills to generate green energy. Almost nobody wants to see windmills from their back gardens but for environmental reasons the government has to build them somewhere. With a collaborative planning process, it would be hard to find a location to build the windmills because nobody wants them close to their house. Another thing which Innes & Booher mention is the contradiction between community knowledge and scientific knowledge. Stories of residents are often seen as anecdotal and irrelevant. Planners think they should educate citizens with their knowledge instead of learning from them. Citizens however often distrust the motives and methods of the planners. The understanding that both planners and citizens can learn from each other is the key. Jasanoff (2003) stated that all knowledge carries value and that everyone can

(11)

11 count as ‘expert’ in the context of the subject of matter. This also relates to the problem that Forester (2006) states about public participation in planning processes. He makes states that it can be messy, unpredictable and uncertain (Forester, 2006). The good intentions of planners do not erase the citizens’ bad histories of working with public authorities and public agencies (Corburn, 2005; Needleman & Needleman, 1974). In public meetings, speakers tend to defend their positions, which brings a certain skepticism to collaborating with other groups (Fung & Wright, 2003). This can sometimes also be said about planners. Actions like posturing, hiding interests and being sceptical about other peoples’ opinions are things what planners sometimes do in collaborative processes (Flyvbjerg, 1998; Yiftachel, 1998).

In this thesis, the policy making process of a zoning plan will be evaluated on whether it was collaborative or rational. The definition of collaborative governance by Ansell & Gash (2008, p.544) will be used as a key criteria for this: “A governing arrangement where one or more public

agencies directly engage non-state stakeholders in a collective decision-making process that is formal, consensus-oriented, and deliberative and that aims to make or implement public policy or manage public programs or assets.”

The policy process of the case will be assessed on two variables and is conceptualized in figure 1. The first one is to what extent it was a rational or collaborative planning process. The main conditions where is looked into for this thesis when assessing the process of the case study on whether it was top-down or collaboratively planned are:

- To what extent other actors outside the municipality were involved in the planning process and how. In the top-down approach, the role of the public would be limited to advising (Innes & Booher, 2014), wherein the collaborative approach the decision making is a collective and consensus-oriented process (Ansell & Gash, 2018).

- How the different interests are implemented

- Whether they had agreed upon goals and values or not.

2.1.3 Problem and vision-based planning

The second variable of the planning process is to what extent it was problem-based or vision-based planning. Couch (2016) described two forms of planning; a negative and a positive way of planning. Urban planning has always consisted of two elements: a positive element proposing a preferred form of development and a negative element controlling or regulating development (Couch, 2016). Traditional land use planning is based on the negative element, and what is called spatial or strategic planning focusses more on the positive element. The case study in this thesis

(12)

12

will be assessed to what extent it was problem- (negative) based planning or vision- (positive) based planning. Albrechts (2004) clearly described the differences between the two. According to him in the 1990’s we generally shifted from a traditional land use planning approach to a strategic approach regarding the organization of space at different levels of scale (Albrechts, 2004). He described some characteristics for both approaches:

Problem-based planning (land-use planning): - Controlling change

- Guiding growth

- Promoting development

- Regulation of private development - Technical or legal regulation Vision-based planning (strategic planning):

- Framework or guidelines for integrated development - Works through the interests of selected stakeholders - Managing change

- Negotiated form in governance

2.2 The production and control of collective goods

Collective goods are defined differently by many authors. For example Kaul (1999) described some conditions of the access of collective goods as rivalry in consumption and as non-excludable regarding potential beneficiaries. Another example comes from Frohlich & Oppenheimer (2015), who describe that collective goods cannot be supplied through market mechanisms. In general collective goods are things that benefit all individuals that are involved (Flache & Dijkstra, 2015). In this thesis, the effect of planning processes on the creation of collective goods will be researched. This is why the definitions of collective goods of Murphy & Fox-Rogers (2015) are used. They specifically described the perceptions of planners on what collective goods are. Despite conceptual debates, only a few empirical studies have researched the notion of collective goods from the perspective of planning practitioners.

The two categories that emerged the most as the definitions of collective goods are ‘Balancing

different competing interests’ and ‘Avoiding/minimising negative effects of development’

(Murphy & Fox-Rogers, 2015). These two conditions for a collective good will be used for this thesis. The collective good should be in the best interest of the population as a whole, which causes that it is not going to suit everyone’s interests but should be in the interest of the society rather than individual communities. This also takes the environmental, social and economic interests into account. The second condition speaks for itself, it is about creating as less negative effects as possible.

These two conditions are seen from a planners perspective and are focussed on the practical. A key condition for collective goods which is mentioned in different literature is still missing, the non-excludability condition as Kaul (1999) and Kallhoff (2014, p.247) name this. A collective good should be available to everyone. Hampton (1987) described this condition as: “Collective

(13)

13

supply," that is, making them available to one person in the community makes them available to all.”

Collective goods are public and non-exclusive and thus available to use for everyone. The last condition for a collective good is that they cannot be supplied through market mechanisms (Frohlich & Oppenheimer, 2015). Frohlich & Oppenheimer explain this condition by the using the non-excludability condition: “Market mechanisms are defined in terms of the supply of goods

to individuals on an exclusive basis, a characteristic that runs directly counter to the good. As a result, collective goods must be supplied through procedures or arrangements other than market mechanisms.” (Frohlich & Oppenheimer, 2015, p.3)

Main conditions for collective goods:

- Balancing different competing interests - Minimising negative effects of development - Non-exclusive

- Cannot be supplied through market mechanisms 2.2.1 A balanced retail mix as a collective good

In this thesis, the retail mix in the center of Amsterdam is seen as a collective good. It is a public good, non-exclusive and is free to use for everyone. As Harvey (2003) would call it: the right to the city, everyone has a right to a retail offering that fits the public.

The research question of this thesis is: What are the differences between the municipality and the residents on how they see a balanced retail mix as a collective good in the Amsterdam zoning plan “Winkeldiversiteit centrum” and how are these differences explained?

The term retail mix is one of the essential terms in the research question and is not explained in the theoretical chapter, which is why it needs further explanation. Retail mix will not be explained by theories because that is not relevant for this thesis. Retail mix is simply explained by the mix of different types of retail in a specific area. In the case of this thesis, this generally applies to the mix of retail which is aimed at tourist and retail which is aimed at locals. The area of the retail mix which is researched in this thesis, is the area where zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ applies to, which can be seen in figure 4 of chapter 3. The municipality of Amsterdam has made the zoning plan to deal with the deterioration of shop diversity in the center of Amsterdam. The balance of the retail mix was off because according to the municipality, too many shops were only aimed at tourists (College van burgemeester en wethouders Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018). Although the retail mix in the center of Amsterdam can possibly still be seen as a collective good, this can change when some parts will become exclusive to one type of audience. This can happen when market mechanisms take over the creation of the collective good, which has always been the case. More and more tourist shops opened in the center of Amsterdam because it is a feasible and growing sector. Here the scale level comes into play on whether it can be seen as collective or not. For the whole of Amsterdam or even the Netherlands, it can be in the public interest to have more tourist shops for economic reasons. However, in the local interest, it is not desirable for everyone. Leaving all the retail spaces in cities open to market mechanisms does not always give the most desirable outcome.

(14)

14 2.3 Conclusion

As described in this chapter, there have been two major discourses in planning theory: rational- and communicative planning. The biggest difference between the two is the extent of public involvement in the planning process. The extent to which the public is involved in a process can play a significant role in the acceptance of plans by the public. This thesis looks into the control of collective goods, in relation to the planning process. As described as one of the conditions for collective goods is that they cannot be supplied through market mechanisms. This means that the government has to play a role in the process. The process will be assessed on for example how the different interests are balanced. If a more communicative/ collaborative approach was used, the different interests were balanced in a way of consensus building. However, if the rational approach was used, the interests of the public would only be used as an advisory role.

Figure 2 shows the main characteristics of each key concept. This diagram will be used for analyzing the data from all the different sources in this research.

Rational planning Collaborative planning Problem-based planning Vision-based planning Collective goods Focuses on the outcome Listening to and learning from different stakeholders

Controlling change Framework or guidelines for integrated development

Balancing interests

Linear process Civic virtues problem

Guiding growth Interests of selected stakeholders

Minimising negative effects Agreed upon values

and goals

Community knowledge

Promoting development

Managing change Non-exclusive

Scientific knowledge Collective and consensus-oriented Regulation of private development Negotiated form in governance Not supplied through market mechanisms Role of the public is

limited to advising

Everyone can count as an ‘expert’

Technical or legal regulation Top-down approach

(15)

15

3. Methodology

This thesis is conceptualized in three different steps with multiple variables figure 3. The main point that this model shows is the relationship between the planning process of the municipality and the perception of collective goods of residents. If the policy plan which is created, is not in line with what the residents of Amsterdam want, it may not contribute to the creation of collective goods. Before the research will be explained, first the research question has to be clear.

3.1 Research questions

To be able to research the possible connection between the planning process and the creation of collective goods, and to know more about the case study of the Amsterdam zoning plan, the following research question is chosen:

What are the differences between the municipality and the residents on how they see a balanced retail mix as a collective good in the Amsterdam zoning plan “Winkeldiversiteit centrum” and how are these differences explained?

This research question consists of different parts and needs the answers of multiple sub-questions so that the main question can be fully answered. The following sub-questions are answered throughout this thesis:

How are collective goods defined in this thesis and why?

How does the municipality deal with the four conditions of collective goods? What was the planning process of the zoning plan and why?

Do people feel excluded from the collective good? Do people think that the negative effects are minimized?

3.2 Research design

(16)

16 The first part of the research design is about describing the planning process of the case study which is analyzed by the theoretical framework. The planning process will be assessed on the variables of collaborative- / top-down planning an problem- / vison-based planning. The next step is to assess the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ and the perception of residents on this plan on the four conditions for controlling collective goods, which are mentioned in chapter 2. The last step is to compare them and see if there are any major differences and if those differences can be related to the planning process.

3.3 Case study

For this thesis a single in-depth case study is chosen because it is a particular case study and has no other cases to compare within the field of tourism planning and zoning. Flyvbjerg (2006, p.3) pointed out a misunderstanding about single case studies: “One cannot generalize on the basis of

an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development.”

According to Flyvbjerg (2006, p.10) this is false and corrected it by stating: “One can often

generalize on the basis of a single case, and the case study may be central to scientific development via generalization as supplement or alter- native to other methods. But formal generalization is overvalued as a source of scientific development, whereas “the force of example” is underestimated.”

This case study can maybe be seen as a black swan, as Flyvbjerg (2006) called it, were usually a collaborative planning process would be used for the creation of collective goods, here this can potentially be different. This is an example of an Atypical or extreme case, which can often reveal more information because they activate more actors and more basic mechanisms in the topic that is studied (Flyvbjerg, 2006). The case study is not seen as a sampling unit to conceive statistical generalization, which would be a fatal flaw according to Yin (2008). The purpose of choosing an extreme or deviant case is: “To obtain information on unusual cases, which can be especially

problematic or especially good in a more closely defined sense.” (Flyvbjerg, 2006, p.12)

In this case study the planning process of the zoning plan will be researched on the variables of to what extent it was collaborative or top down and to what extent it was vision based or problem-based planning. Also, their view on the definition of ‘a balanced retail mix’ and ‘tourist shop’ will be researched. This makes it an embedded single case study when the model of Yin (2008) is used.

The case study in this thesis is about the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum.’ The preparatory plan (voorbereidingsbesluit) came into force on the sixth of October of 2017. The zoning plan applies to the canal district and a couple of streets which are connected to the inner city and can be seen in figure 4. With this plan, the municipality tries to restore the retail balance because more and more tourist shops open every year. This causes a one-sided retail offering, which is not valuable for the local residents. With this plan, no

Figure 4: Location of zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ (College van B&W Gemeente

(17)

17 more tourist shops can be opened in the center of Amsterdam. More details about the plan can be found in chapter 5.

3.4 Data collection and analysis

To be able to fully answer the research question, multiple types of data are collected. The first type is the public debate, which gathers all the information about the context of this thesis topic and helps to better understand and analyze the other data sources. The expert interviews and questionnaire provide the data that is needed to understand both the perspectives of the municipality and the residents of Amsterdam.

3.4.1 Public debate

Because this thesis specifically focusses on the Amsterdam situation of tourism, an analysis of the public debate in the newspapers is done. The analysis serves the purpose of getting a better sense of the history of the tourism debate in Amsterdam and to know where the different opinions of residents are potentially coming from. It also provides additional information and background data for the case study of the zoning plan. The public debate analysis is a method of data collection which is complementary to the interviews and the questionnaire. The research of the public debate is done with the use of the Nexis Uni database. This database has all the Dutch (and some international) newspaper articles starting from the ’80s till today. After collecting all the articles about the tourism debate in Amsterdam from the last 10-15 years, a timeline has been made with different time periods of the public debate surrounding this topic.

3.4.2 Policy documents

As a preparation for the expert interviews and as support for the public debate and the analysis, multiple policy documents from the municipality of Amsterdam are read. The links to the documents are in the list of references at the end of this thesis. The following document were read:

- Bestemmingsplan Winkeldiversiteit centrum - Voorbereidingsbesluit Postcodegebied 1012 - Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040

- Stand van de Balans 2016 - Stad in balans 2018-2022

- Ruimte voor de economie van morgen - Sturen op een divers winkelgebied 3.4.3 Expert interviews

In-depth semistructured interview data is the empirical basis for many qualitative studies in social science (Cambell et al, 2013), like in this thesis. To get to know everything about the planning process of the zoning plan, an expert interview is done with the a senior policymaker who worked on the plan and also with other people who were involved in the process. The interviews are conducted in a semi-structured way, to give interviewees more space to talk broadly about the

(18)

18 topic but it will focus enough to get all the information that is needed for this thesis. Much information about the planning process is already public and is discussed in the public debate chapter, but the expert interviews are needed to confirm or deny some details and to provide additional information. Every interview needed a different list of topics for questions because every interviewee was chosen for a different reason and topic. The first interview was mainly about the zoning plan itself and the second one was more about the participation process of it and the connection with the neighbourhood and the third one was about the participation process of the plan and how residents are involved in municipal plans in general. After the three interviews, saturation was reached because all aspects were covered which were needed for the research. More people were suggested by the interviewees in the form of snowballing but they could only provide me information about the legal side of the zoning plan. For the legal side, lots of research is already done like a legal analysis by Weiringa Advocaten (2018) and a master’s thesis by (Van Zwieten de Blom, 2018) at the University of Amsterdam. To come back to the statement that the interviewees were chosen carefully, the first interviewee is the a senior policymaker who worked on the zoning plan “Winkeldiversiteit centrum”. The interviewee is an employee of the city of Amsterdam and worked extensively on the zoning plan. That interview provided me with additional information about the planning process of the zoning plan and the reasoning behind it which I could not find in newspapers or other online sources. The second interviewee was also an employee of the city of Amsterdam but had a better connection to the area and its residents where this zoning plan is applied to. In the second interview, I got a better sense for how residents are involved in planning processes in general and for this zoning plan specific. When I asked specific questions about the zoning plan I realized that I had reached saturation because I heard examples and pieces of information which I already heard in the first interview. To really get to know the details about the involvement of residents in the planning process, a chairman of one of the resident associations in the area was interviewed. The interviewee could verify the statements of the employees of the municipality of Amsterdam whether they were true or false. The interviews regarding the planning process are analyzed by coding, based on the overview of the key concepts for this thesis, explained in chapter 2. This overview can be seen in figure 2. The number at the end of each of the paraphrases mentioned in this chapter refers to the interviewee. List of interviewees:

1. Senior policymaker for the municipality of Amsterdam. 2. Area supervisor for the municipality of Amsterdam.

3. Chairman of a resident association in Amsterdam center and former ward councilor. 3.4.4 Questionnaire

To get to know about how residents think about the zoning plan and how they see the retail mix as a collective good, an online questionnaire for residents was done. The questionnaire has only been made available for people who live in the area where the zoning plan applies to. The questionnaire consists of 4 questions and asks the residents about how they feel about the problems of tourism and the plans of the municipality. The questionnaire has been sent to multiple resident associations, resident platforms and other resident representatives of the inner city of Amsterdam. A full list of the associations which received the questionnaire and the list of questions can be found in the appendix. The tool which is used for the online questionnaire is

(19)

19 Google forms. This tool makes it easy to analyze the data because it can for example, summarize the answers per question and per respondent.

To spread the questionnaire and to get as many respondents as possible, an email was sent to various resident associations and neighbourhood platforms of the inner city to ask if their members could fill out the questionnaire. This was done because it was the most effective way to reach out to as many people as possible who live in the area where the zoning plan applies to. The questionnaire has been used as a backup method to gather the data of the opinions of residents. The first plan was to do street interviews with residents, and optionally some tourists. This method would have made it possible to have in-depth conversations which residents and it would allow asking follow-up questions, which can be very helpful for qualitative research. Due to unforeseen circumstances, it was not possible to do the street-interviews and the switch to the online questionnaire.

In total, 44 people responded to the questionnaire. To make it really easy to fill out the questionnaire, and to get as many respondents as possible, the respondents were given a lot of freedom. For example, respondents could answer the questions as long or short as they wanted, and they did not need to answer every question to submit the questionnaire. This is why only 39 people answered question 4. This did not cause any limitations because the questionnaire was analysed qualitatively.

However, the questionnaire did have a couple of limitations. The limitation is that probably only active residents are gathered as respondents, which is not representative of all the residents. All the respondents of the questionnaire can be seen as active residents because they are all in some way a member of a resident association/platform. Many of them likely want to participate with plans regarding their neighbourhood. It can also be the case that these people are less positive about their neighbourhood and the municipal participation processes, although this cannot be proven for this research.

Like described before, all respondents were in some way an active resident. To have completely anonymous data results, the questionnaire did not ask for gender, age or other personal data. This caused a second limitation because there could not be made comparisons between answers in different demographic groups like the study from (Bastias-Perez & Var, 1995). They researched the perceived impacts of tourism by residents. It turned out that age was a good determinant for residential attitudes towards tourism. The same comparison can not be done for this thesis.

3.5 Data analysis

Once the data collection was done, the data from the different methods were analyzed to answer the main research question. The expert interviews, as well as the questionnaire results, are analysed by using figure 2 of chapter 2. That overview of all the concepts was as a coding scheme. Each key and each of their characteristics got a separate code. For example, if the interviewee mentioned the first characteristic of the first key concept it would get the code A1.

(20)

20

4. Tourism in Amsterdam over the last years, a

public debate

Over the last couple of years, the public debate about the increasing amount of tourists in Amsterdam and all the consequences that come with it has been growing. This chapter shows the public debate about this topic over the last ten years with the use of newspaper articles, divided into different times.

4.1 2007/2008/2009: Financial crisis

In 2007 and 2008, a global financial crisis started (Goodhart, 2008). This also had an impact on the tourist industry in Amsterdam, starting in 2008 (ANP, 2008). According to Amsterdam Tourism & Convention Bureau (ATCB) the number of bookings of hotel nights in the Amsterdam and surroundings was expected to be decreased by 3 percent in 2008. In 2007 the number of hotel bookings was still growing, but in 2008 it decreased, possibly due to a lack of Americans and Brits visiting Amsterdam (ANP, 2008). The impact of the financial crisis was also noticeable in the number of visitors to tourist attractions. In the first quarter of 2019, the number of visitors to tourist attractions in Amsterdam was 16 percent down, compared to the same period in 2018 (FD, 2019).

4.2 2010/2011/2012: Tourist numbers slowly increasing again

When the global economy started to grow again, tourist numbers in Amsterdam started growing with it. In the first five months of 2010 Amsterdam had a growth in the number of overnight stays (Laan, 2010). This does not say much because, for the most part, room rates of hotels were still below the level of some years before (Laan, 2010). To get more tourists in Amsterdam and to be competitive with other big cities in the world, the director of ATCB wants more attention for the cultural heritage of the city, such as the Stelling van Amsterdam (Reformatorisch Dagblad, 2011). This is a 135 kilometer long water line of forts and waterworks that was primarily built between 1881 and 1914. The director of ATCB also wanted to attract more tourists of city trips, because this was the fastest growing form of tourism at that time (Reformatorisch Dagblad, 2011). In 2010 a record number (back then) of more than 12 million tourists visited Amsterdam. Early 2011 also showed an increasing trend of tourist numbers in Amsterdam. This showed that the tourist numbers were rising again since the financial crisis. According to a study from ACTB, a third of the visitors of Amsterdam mentioned the reputation and the atmosphere as a reason to visit Amsterdam (Wendel, 2012). The presence of coffee shops and soft drugs plays a role for 16.5 percent of the visitors to come to Amsterdam. In 2007 that was 7.3 percent. Shopping, on the other hand, has become a less important reason to visit Amsterdam (Wendel, 2012).

4.3 2013/2014/2015: Problems getting worse and the municipality shows first

signs of urgency

During this period the general consensus of people being happy with the growth of tourism after the crisis shifted towards complaints of Amsterdam being too crowded with tourists. The negative effects of the growth of tourism became very clear during this time. The headers of some of the articles show this:

(21)

21 In 2014 NRC Handelsblad wrote: “Amsterdam perishes in its own filth” (Pijbes, 2014, translated from Dutch). And Trouw wrote: “Amsterdam cannot become like Venice.” (Obbink, 2014, translated from Dutch). In 2015 BNR said: “Amsterdam's tourism is growing too much.” (BNR, 2015, translated from Dutch) and De Groene Amsterdammer wrote: “This is not a museum.

People live here; Amsterdam” (Milikowski, 2015)

In 2014 NRC newspaper suggested to the city council to act quickly to prevent the tourist problems from becoming bigger (Pijbes, 2014). Amsterdam reopened some of their museums and was hugely benefitting from the worldwide growth of tourism (Pijbes, 2014). Pijbes (2014) stated that this was by no means a reason to sit back, rather the opposite. The big success of tourism was not a pleasure for everyone. Residents complained and administrators and authorities responded. This action and reaction situation was not preventing problems from becoming worse.

Many Dutch newspapers wrote about the complaints people had about tourism. While the number of visitors was still increasing, the number of inhabitants of Amsterdam was decreasing and with that, the quality of life and the quality of the facilities decreased too (Millikowski, 2015). Muskens, tourism documentary maker, told De Groene Amsterdam that she increasingly sees the historic city center as an attraction and a marketable product instead of as a practically functioning area (Millikowski, 2015).

Some of the councilors and policymakers of Amsterdam reacted to the complaints. The city center district committee wrote the following about Amsterdam in 2014: “Beautiful things are

happening here, but the interests clash the hardest here” (Obbink, 2014, translated from Dutch).

In 2013 residents, in particular, suffered the most from the growing tourist flow (Obbink, 2014).

“We must therefore look for a good balance”, the committee states (Obbink, 2014). "It is still going well", “But the number of visitors continues to grow, so we have to keep an eye on that balance”, chairman Boudewijn Oranje stated (Obbink, 2014, translated from Dutch).

In the 2014 plans of the central district, the emphasis was on keeping out ‘ongein’ (Obbink, 2014), freely translated as ‘stupid things’. “There are tourists in Amsterdam who see it as a Disneyland

experience, with inappropriate actions surrounding bachelor parties. That does cause inconvenience.” (Councillor Oranje, 2014, from Obbink, 2014, translated from Dutch).

In 2014, chief director of Rijksmuseum, Wim Pijbes, wrote: “Amsterdam is a fantastic city and

the showpiece for our country. It is therefore important to unitedly work to develop a sustainable, long-term policy with room for tourists, or rather guests from all over the world.”

He also mentioned that the city council has to change its direction so that Amsterdam can be a loveable and liveable city for visitors and residents after 2014 (Pijbes, 2014). After the municipality of Amsterdam saw the urgency of the tourist problems in the previous years, they started working on policy- and vision documents to ‘restore the balance’ in the city. In 2015 the councilor Ollongren presented the first version of the ‘Stad in Balans‘ (City in Balance) policy document (Ollongren, 2015). This policy document became a program with yearly updates.

4.4 2016/2017: Amsterdam launches policy measures to deal with tourism

Although the general consensus surrounding tourism in Amsterdam became very negative, some people still saw the positive effects of it. In 2016 de Volkskrant (Dutch newspaper) published an article about PhD-researcher Egbert van der Zee from KU Leuven who argued that Airbnb is a

(22)

22

good thing for Amsterdam and its tourists (Van der Zee, 2016). Van der Zee (2016) wrote an article in Dutch newspaper, Volkskrant, where he states that tourism affects the liveability of the city. Airbnb is generally seen as part of the problem, according to Volkskrant, but the opposite is true according to Van der Zee (2016). Airbnb claims to attract the right kind of tourism that cities want. While the average stay of tourists in Amsterdam is decreasing, Airbnb users stay in the city longer (Van der Zee, 2016). They stay an average of 3.3 nights in Amsterdam, compared to 1.9 nights for regular hotel visitors. This increase in the duration of stays can reduce the negative effects of tourism on the city (Van der Zee, 2016). In the case of Airbnb, a larger share of the income from tourism ends up in the local economy instead of international hotel chains (Van der Zee, 2016).

The available Airbnb accommodations are spread throughout Amsterdam, mostly within the A10 ring road (see figure 5). The accommodations in the canal belt are more expensive, but not more prevalent than in other neighbourhoods (Van der Zee, 2016). This line of thought, to see Airbnb as positive, could be part of a clear vision from the municipality about how to deal with tourism. However, in reality, the municipality looks at problems case to case and tries to solve it with policy measures. For example, in 2019, councilor Ivens announced stricter rules for renting out apartments for Airbnb (Couzy, 2019). These new rules apply to specific neighbourhoods which are becoming unliveable due to tourism.

Besides Volkskrant, Het Parool (Amsterdam newspaper) also mentions some positive effects of tourism. The article by Lukken (2016) argues to embrace the fact that ‘Amsterdam is becoming a theme park’, although some articles of different newspapers argue the opposite, like NRC Next (NRC Next, 2016) and Trouw (De Groot, 2015). Lukken (2016) argues that Amsterdam can learn a lot from theme parks on how to deal with big crowds. “In such a park, people think about visitor

flows, the product and the target groups they want to attract or not. There is a right mix of attractions, facilities, entertainment, transport and shops. Hospitality is the core business. The guest is central. They often work thematically, there is clear routing and things are 'managed'.”

(Lukken, 2016).

Figure 5: Spread of Airbnb apartments in Amsterdam (Inside Airbnb, 2019)

(23)

23 One of the things Amsterdam can learn from theme parks which is mentioned in the article by Lukken (2016) is clear zoning. The Efteling has ‘Ruigrijk’, where the exciting and more 'thrilling' attractions are located. This could for example argue to maintain the red light district and turning it into some kind of party district. He also argues when attractions need expansion, you can think of creating new hotspots. A good example is the A'DAM Tower, which together with Eye film museum became a popular destination for tourists on the north side of the IJ river. By clustering certain attractions, visitors and target groups will be better spread throughout the city(Lukken 2016).

The ideas by Lukken (2016) could also be part of a vision document for tourism by the municipality. The Senior lecturer, Tourism & Leisure from the NHTV university of applied sciences Breda, Goof Lukken, ends with a statement to not forget the economic value of tourism in Amsterdam and The Netherlands. This statement makes sense if the growth numbers are ignored. In 2016 there has been an estimated growth of 1.2 million tourists, almost twice the growth of 2015 (MENAFN, 2016). The extreme growth of tourism was referred to as the new golden age of tourism in Amsterdam (MENAFN, 2016). When the municipality of Amsterdam makes decisions and policies about tourism, the economic value of it would logically be the biggest conflict of interests, together with the interests of the residents. When the municipality would see a balanced retail mix as a collective good, it should balance all the interests. Looking back at the public debate until this point, the municipality seems not to have balanced all interests well. The city marketing of Amsterdam is potentially one of the reasons why the number of tourists increased very fast. This assumably gave the municipality a significant financial boost, but the consequences for the residents seem to be ignored. This can for example be explained by figure 6 which shows that residents feel like their neighbourhood is too crowded.

The significant growth of tourism has several disadvantages, in particular for residents. Research from the city of Amsterdam, which was published in October 2017 showed the disadvantages of tourists, experienced by residents (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017b):

1. There are nuisances in places with many visitors. 2. The diversity of facilities for residents is poor. 3. The image of Amsterdam is changing.

4. Visitors cause costs for the municipality.

5. The characteristics of Amsterdam are deteriorating. 6. Social clashes are increasing.

7. The atmosphere in the city is becoming less pleasant. 8. Amsterdam becomes more unsafe.

9. Amsterdam is becoming more expensive.

10. The large number of visitors makes the Amsterdam economy vulnerable.

The second disadvantage in particular is related to this thesis research topic. People experience a decrease in the diversity of shops/facilities. The research (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017b) mentions three reasons for this phenomenon: 1) Entrepreneurs in the center of Amsterdam are increasingly focusing on visitors with their products and services. 2) More events take place in the public space, this (temporarily) prevents residents from using them. 3) Residents make less use of the facilities in the city because they want to avoid the big crowds.

(24)

24 To deal with the imbalance in the city and to have a clear vision to move forward, the municipality continued with the City in Balance program. Besides the City in Balance policy document, the city had to take some legally binding measures.

4.4.1 Amsterdam bans ‘tourist shops’

As mentioned in chapter 1, in 2017 the municipality of Amsterdam secretly launched a Voorbereidingsbesluit (preparatory plan for a zoning plan) to ban all new tourist shops. Opinions about this plan were mixed, and it got widely covered in Dutch newspapers. The ban immediately applied to the city center and 40 shopping streets (Boztas, 2017). "By not allowing

new tourist shops to open, we make sure our city center remains attractive and liveable for Amsterdammers and our visitors," said the deputy mayor (Daily Telegraph, Boztas, 2017).

Amsterdam did this because the balance is missing, and it was not good for the quality of life (Boztas, 2017). The old zoning plan already contained rules which made it impossible to open souvenir shops, smart shops, money exchange offices, and massage salons. Smart entrepreneurs responded to those regulations with new concepts that were not prohibited, like the infamous Nutella shops (Interviewee 2, 2019). According to the Volkskrant article from Van Weezel (2017) the new plan was there to obstruct certain unwanted middle classes. The zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ seems to be a problem-based plan because it prevents tourist shops from opening. In this case, the tourist shops are the problem and the municipality takes

measures against it after they noticed the problem. Figure 6 shows that the negative views on tourism are not only coming from newspapers, but also from the residents of Amsterdam. The figure shows the opinions towards crowdedness in Amsterdam’s neighbourhoods. People who live in the inner city of Amsterdam experience too much crowdedness, mainly in Centrum West. Although the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit Centrum’ is not about making Amsterdam less crowded, it can potentially deal with that too by making streets less attractive for tourists.

(25)

25

4.5 2018/2019: The debate surrounding the ban of tourist shops is growing, as

well as the actual numbers of tourists coming to Amsterdam

Following the launch of the Voorbereidingsbesluit, the debate on tourism became bigger and bigger. Some newspaper and magazines showed their concerns about the growing amount of tourists in Amsterdam with the following headers:

“How could Amsterdam tourism become hell?” (Forum, 2018, translated from Dutch) “In Amsterdam, tourism growth is not the enemy, bad management is” (Eturbo news,

2019)

“Tourism grows explosively, Amsterdam in danger of becoming full” (Groenendijk,

Algemeen Dagblad, 2018a, translated from Dutch)

Although the municipality of Amsterdam has made a zoning plan to deal with some of the negative effects of tourism, it cannot have an immediate impact. Kees van Wijk, manager of VVV Netherlands (The main association for tourism in the Netherlands) pleads for a tourism director because tourism does not get any attention from politicians (Forum, 2018). Even though it is one of the fastest growing economic sectors and there are many interfaces like spatial planning, nature, mobility and culture it still does not get any attention according to Van Wijk (Forum, 2018). In contradiction to Van Wijk’s statements, Reformatorisch Dagblad wrote about the plans of the new mayor and aldermen of Amsterdam. One of their main action list points is to reduce the negative effects of tourism (Reformatorisch Dagblad, 2018). Raising the tourist tax and controlling Airbnb are one of the measures (Reformatorisch Dagblad, 2018). The new board of Amsterdam showed their intentions do something about the problems of tourism but the public was still very sceptical about it. This also shows a clear problem based way of thinking and a potential lack of vision. By only taking measures against negative effects, the policy of the municipality will always lack behind. The growth of tourism seems inevitable according to Trouw newspaper (Van Heerde, 2018). Amsterdam ombudsman Zuurmond had critique on the tourism policy in Amsterdam:

“The government deliberately encouraged tourism after the economic crisis, but has forgotten to put the brakes on again and take additional measures." (Van Heerde, 2018,

translated from Dutch)

The consequences of this are daily noticeable in the city and, according to him, cause unsafe situations. Like stated before, the growth of tourism in Amsterdam is not likely to slow down. NBCT (Netherlands Board of Tourism & Conventions) is expecting Amsterdam to have 32 million visitors in 2030 (Kruyswijk, 2018). That number raises many questions for the city like: How to fit that amount of people on that small piece of land? How to make laws for this? Which facilities do you need?

If Amsterdam does not want to have a different city by 2030, there need to be made some policy changes in order to deal with 32 million visitors a year. One of the first measures is the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ which is supposed to deal with the decrease of shop diversity. The question still is whether this policy measure is effective and what the residents want or not.

(26)

26

5. Analyzing the planning process of ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’

To know where the potential differences between the municipality and the residents of dealing with ‘a balanced retail mix’ are coming from, the planning process of the zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’ is analyzed by reading the public documents as well as expert interviews. Figure 7, based on the theoretical framework is used for the analysis.

Rational planning Collaborative planning Problem-based planning Vision-based planning Collective goods ee Focuses on the outcome Listening to and learning from different stakeholders

Controlling change Framework or guidelines for integrated development

Balancing interests

Linear process Civic virtues problem Guiding growth Interests of selected stakeholders

Minimising negative effects

Agreed upon values and goals

Community knowledge

Promoting development

Managing change Non-exclusive

Scientific knowledge Collective and consensus-oriented Regulation of private development Negotiated form in governance

Not supplied through market mechanisms

Role of the public is limited to advising

Everyone can count as an ‘expert’

Technical or legal regulation

Free to use

Top-down approach

5.1 Timeline ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum’

To better understand the planning process of the zoning plan, a timeline of the process has been made with the use of different online documents. The zoning plan did not come out of the blue and was among other things set up by a preparatory plan.

- The municipal council approved the 'Diversity of shops and facilities’ administrative order: July 12, 2016

During administrative consultations between the alderman of Economy, the alderman of Spatial Planning and the Executive Committee of the borough Center on 9 June 201, they agreed to prepare an administrative order in order to limit and prevent the decline of the diversity of shops and facilities in Amsterdam (College van burgemeester en wethouders, 2018). This administrative order was the first sign of the municipality trying to minimize negative effects of the decrease of the diversity of shops. It also showed the first sign of being a problem based planning process because the municipal board based their administrative order on the problems they noticed in the report of ‘Stad in balans Amsterdam 2016’ (Ruimtelijke plannen, 2018).

(27)

27

- The municipal council approved the ‘Aiming for a diverse shopping area’ report:

February 28, 2017

The report indicates how the municipality and other stakeholders from the shopping area like entrepreneurs, property owners and residents can influence the diversity of shops so that it remains attractive for everyone (College van burgemeester en wethouders, 2018). The report contains three recommendations. The first recommendation is the most important for the zoning plan, "Work out scenarios for new spatial control instruments" (Gemeente Amsterdam, 2017d). The zoning plan may contain rules which prevent certain types of retail to not expand any further. Decisions to ban certain types of retail cannot be made on a random basis. It is only possible with a valid argument, with a spatially relevant reason (College van burgemeester en wethouders, 2018). In order to argue that a particular sector has a negative spatial effect, a thorough problem analysis must be made. Directly linked to this, a vision must be developed that, also on the basis of spatial arguments, clearly indicates what the desired future situation of a certain street or area is (College van burgemeester en wethouders, 2018). On the basis of the problem analysis and the area-oriented vision, there can be determined which instruments can be used to ward off the described types of retail (College van burgemeester en wethouders, 2018). This that the municipality had to make a vision to be able to make their zoning plan to ban tourist shops. Although this may seem like an indicator for a vision based planning process, the vision had to be based on the problem analysis. This still makes it a plan which is all based on solving a problem.

- Voorbereidingsbesluit ‘postcodegebied 1012’ came into force: October 6, 2017 After a year of work, in October 2017 the voorbereidingsbesluit which bans all new tourist shops came into force. When it was announced in the Staatscourant (Government Gazette), it came directly into force because the process of the plan was all done in secret (Couzy, 2017). The municipal council agreed with the plan in secret to prevent more tourist shops from opening. By making the plan in secret there were no possibilities to implement a participation process. The ban of tourist shops applied to the following five definitions: “forms of retail that, according to their advertising, presentation, assortment

and / or business, focus on day visitors and / or tourists; Facilities for consumer-friendly services that according to their advertising, presentation, offer, assortment and / or business, focus on day visitors and / or tourists; Special facilities that focus on the wishes of visitors for (taste) experience, sensation and / or (group) entertainment, in which the possible artistic, historical or educational character is subordinate and which are characterized by a profit-making business; Offices with counter functions that, according to their advertising, presentation, offer and / or business, focus on day visitors and / or tourists; Forms of retailing that focus on the sale of food and / or drinks that are primarily used for direct consumption.” (College van bugemeester en wethouders, 2018, translated

from Dutch)

- Neighbourhood meeting Westelijke Grachtengordel (Canal district West): December 13, 2017

After the voorbereidingsbesluit was made public, the municipality could talk about it with residents and other people who were interested in the plan. On December 13th,_{2017, a}

(28)

28 (Lavell, 2017). For this meeting, residents could give their opinions on different topics/municipal plans and have a discussion with the makers of it. One of the topics which was discussed that day was ‘diversiteit winkelaanbod’ (diversity of shops), introduced with the following statement: “The municipality does not think it is desirable

for more shops to focus exclusively on tourists and visitors and is therefore taking measures. The municipality works together with all stakeholders from the neighbourhood. What is already happening, what would we like, what is possible? We would be happy to discuss this with you.”(Lavell, 2017)

Although residents were able to give their opinion about the topic of the decrease of the diversity of shops, the employees of the municipality are in no way obligated to use the opinions from residents.

- Zoning plan ‘Winkeldiversiteit centrum” (amended): Launched on July 18, 2018 After the preparatory plan was launched, a total of 10 amendments were submitted by residents and shop owners. Although there were some amendments, no big structural changes have been made to the plan. The zoning plan is twofold in the legal sense. Firstly, a number of uses are prohibited by this plan. Secondly, changes are made to various concept definitions in almost all zoning plans for the city center and some concepts are added (College van B&W Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018). A new group of uses is prohibited with this plan. With regard to all current zoning plans, this concerns the following concepts: tourist shops, tourist services, offices with counter function aimed at tourists, food shops and facilities aimed at entertainment (College van B&W Gemeente Amsterdam, 2018).

Controlling the goods : how Amsterdam controls its deteriorating retail market and how the public is involved