Place‐based social exclusion: redlining in the Netherlands

Abstract

‘Redlining’ is a form of place‐based exclusion. It is widely documented in the US, but not in Europe. This paper focuses on a comparative analysis of redlining practices in the two largest cities of the Netherlands: Amsterdam and Rotterdam. It shows that redlining was common practice in Rotterdam in 1999. In 2001, no signs of redlining were found in Rotterdam. However, ‘yellowlining’ (lower loan‐to‐value ratios) was still common in some parts of Rotterdam. In Amsterdam, no neighbourhoods were faced with redlining in either 1999 or 2001. However, in 1999 some neighbourhoods were yellowlined. This paper aims to get a better understanding of the nature and the institutional context of redlining in the Netherlands by explaining how the differences in redlining practices between Amsterdam and Rotterdam, and between 1999 and 2001, can be explained. The National Mortgage Guarantee as well as socio‐historical, and housing and mortgage market differences and changes, are instrumental in explaining these differences in redlining practices.

Involuntary Isolation: Ethnic Preferences and Residential Segregation

“…As a consequence of this urgent need, they often choose neighborhoods which are in lesser demand, being the less attractive neighborhoods (Regioplan, 2005). If ethnic minorities do choose to buy a house instead of renting one, processes of redlining influence the housing choices of ethnic minorities (Aalbers, 2005). The Dutch Equal Treatment Commission recently concluded that several banks apply additional lending conditions in some parts of Dutch cities, making it particularly difficult for ethnic minorities to obtain a mortgage (CGB, 2006).…”

Neoliberalization of Housing in Sweden: Gentrification, Filtering, and Social Polarization

“…Filtering is the opposite of gentrification. Whereas a neighborhood undergoing gentrification experiences increasing status and reinvestment, filtering is associated with decreasing status and disinvestment, not uncommonly associated with redlining (Dingemans 1979;Squires 1992;Aalbers 2005Aalbers , 2006. Both processes are based on residential mobility; increasing or decreasing income or status of the "stayer" population is not gentrification or filtering.…”

Geographies of Housing Finance: The Mortgage Market in Milan, Italy

“…This paper focuses on uneven geographical conditions in the mortgage market of the Milan region, i.e., on exclusion from, or less favourable conditions for, mortgage loans, based on geographical differences. The paper follows research on the same topic in the Dutch cities of Amsterdam, Arnhem, Rotterdam, and The Hague (Aalbers 2003, 2005a, 2005b, 2007), and is part of the same research programme. The point of this research is not only to uncover the lines that banks draw between what they see as profitable and unprofitable investments, but also to establish how, where, and why these lines are drawn, and what the consequences are of drawing these lines—in this case in the metropolitan area of Milan, Italy.…”

“…In addition to these three factors, lenders also make an assessment of the broader macroeconomic and regulatory climate. Economic recessions may, for instance, lead to more caution on the lenders' side and may even increase the likeliness of redlining and yellowlining practices (see also Aalbers 2005b): “The purchase of consumption fund items [like housing] via mortgages and other forms of consumer credit is sensitive to the availability of money” (Harvey 1982:231). Capital switching from the primary to the secondary circuit of capital takes shape within these macroeconomic processes; capital switching between places can also take place in the third factor of assessing loan applications.…”