Housing tenure, urban development and environmental inequality

Environmental pollutants are not evenly distributed across geographical spaces. Studies have shown that areas with concentrated disadvantages often bear the brunt of severe pollution and environmental stress (Pearce et al., 2010; Muller, Sampson, and Winter, 2018). The housing market, as a social and spatial distributive mechanism, plays a pivotal role in structuring these environmental inequalities. Housing exposure to environmental hazards varies based on tenure, price, typology, and location, making it a critical link between unequal environmental quality distributions and individual exposure.

While environmental justice analyses have extensively focused on neighborhood-level disparities (Bullard, 1996; Holifield, Porter, and Walker, 2010), the role of housing policies in shaping exposure patterns has received less attention. This gap in research is significant, given the central role of housing in determining environmental exposure.

The Dual Pressures on Housing and Planning Institutions

In recent decades, planning and housing institutions have faced increasing pressures from (neo)liberalisation and financialisation. These pressures have led to a focus on commodified housing and high-quality living environments, often at odds with social and sustainability goals. Sustainable or green developments, while beneficial, can exacerbate spatial inequalities when they come at increased prices and rents (Gould and Lewis, 2016; Anguelovski et al., 2022).

Institutional changes in housing and planning have led to a paradoxical situation where urban development is torn between creating sustainable living environments for all and market-based housing developments that increase socio-spatial inequalities. This duality underscores the need to understand how housing and planning policies contribute to varied environmental exposures and inequalities.

Environmental Inequality and Housing Tenure

To shed light on this issue, a study compared the environmental exposure of housing built before and after 2010 by tenure in the Amsterdam region. The year 2010 marked a shift towards more market-oriented development following the 2008 Great Financial Crisis (GFC) and the 2010 Debt Crisis (Boterman and Van Gent, 2023). The post-GFC period in the Netherlands saw an acceleration of social-rental housing retrenchment and a prioritisation of market housing.

The study defined environmental inequality as the unequal distribution of environmental burdens and hazards, as well as resources. It focused on exposures related to air quality (NO2 and particulate matter), noise, greenery, and heat stress, both separately and as an indexed score. The combined index helps identify communities suffering from multiple environmental exposures, which can have long-term health impacts (Morello-Frosch et al., 2011).

Findings and Implications

The study found that owner-occupied housing is generally less exposed to pollution than rental housing, with variations depending on the building period. Contrary to expectations, private rental housing units, rather than social-rental housing, are increasingly built on highly exposed sites. This pattern is likely due to the high demand for urban rental housing and the market’s low price elasticity in response to environmental factors.

These findings challenge straightforward associations between housing tenure and environmental exposure. They highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of how different housing tenures relate to environmental inequality over time. The study also underscores the role of housing and urban policies in shaping micro-level socio-spatial and environmental inequalities.

Policy Implications

The study’s findings have several policy implications. First, environmental quality and its relationship with inequality must be at the forefront of urban and housing debates. Market rationales, if unchecked, can lead to an accumulation of environmental, housing, socio-economic, and health inequalities. Policymakers and planners need to be aware of these cumulative effects to prevent further marginalisation of already disadvantaged communities.

Second, densification, while fitting within sustainability aims, must consider environmental impacts such as the loss of green space and increases in heat island effects. Regional planning must make these choices and consequences explicit to ensure that environmental and health implications are shared fairly and justly.

Conclusion

In conclusion, housing policies play a crucial role in structuring environmental inequalities. By focusing on how housing and urban policies shape micro-level socio-spatial and environmental inequalities, we can better understand the broader political and structural factors at play. This nuanced perspective is essential for developing policies that promote environmental justice and equitable housing outcomes.

Anna-Maria Ntarladima, Cody Hochstenbach, Mendel Giezen,Wouter van Gent