7 research outputs found
IGJR 1/2020: Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?
No full textThe Intergenerational Justice Review (www.igjr.org) is a peer-reviewed English language journal, reflecting the current state of research on intergenerational justice. The IGJR publishes articles from humanities, social sciences, and international law. The journal is released biannually and employs a double-blind peer review process. Its editorial board consists of about 50 internationally renowned experts from ten different countries. IGJR is indexed under Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The topic of issue 1/2020 (which is planned to be the first part of a double issue) will be“Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?” We welcome submissions to the issue 1/2020 that analyse the housing situation of the young generation. Topic outlineIn many European countries, and especially in large cities and university towns, affordable housing is a pressing and sometimes explosive issue. In the debate about such questions as home ownership or rent increase caps (Mietpreisbremse – German: rent brakes), the intergenerational perspective is often forgotten. But different generations are affected in noticeably different ways. Rising rent and purchase prices and the failure of housing construction programmes make it ever more difficult for young people to access the housing market. The quality of housing is a key factor in living standards and wellbeing, as well as an integral element of social integration, yet in 2014 a total of 7.8% of young people in the European Union (aged between 15 and 29) were in severe housing need, 25.7% of the young people in the EU lived in overcrowded households, and 13.6% lived in households that spent 40% or more of their equivalised disposable income on housing (Eurostat 2016).In response to the 2008/9 financial crisis, government programmes for public and social housing aimed at the poorer parts of the population were cut back, leading to diminishing access to affordable housing, especially in urbanised areas. For young people, this means that they have to pay higher rents. Today, therefore, they often live longer in their parental homes, or in the private rental sector, than previous generations (Ronald/Lennartz 2018).What is often referred to as a “housing crisis” can certainly be seen as a question of intergenerational justice, because the baby boomers had easier access to housing or to the means to finance it. Today, the baby boomer generation benefits from housing inequality in two ways: through property values and rental income. At the same time, with pension systems under pressure because of ageing populations, the ownership of residential property has become an important component of old-age provision (Helbrecht/ Geisenkauser 2012).Younger generations, on the other hand, are disadvantaged in two respects: today’s increased demand leads to further pressure on the housing market in the low-price segment, which in turn leads to an increase in the rent burden for lower and middle income groups, and also makes the purchase of residential property more difficult. In many parts of Europe, such as the Southeast of the UK, in the 1980s the average cost of a first home was three to four times the annual average salary; today it can be ten or twelve times the annual average salary.From this perspective, it can certainly be argued that the housing market situation is not intergenerationally fair. And in many European countries, ownership of real estate has become a much greater source of wealth inequality between generations than salary differentials.This gloomy picture of housing and home ownership is, however, by no means universal. Statistics point to significant differences between countries, and international comparisons show that successful housing policies are possible. An EU comparison shows that the percentage of households managed by a person aged 18–29 who spends 40% or more of their disposable income on housing costs ranges from 1.3% (in Malta) to 45.4% (in Greece) (Leach et al. 2016). It is clear that some countries perform significantly better than others in providing affordable housing for the next generation.Articles could approach the topic through a broad range of questions, including:How did the housing crisis come to be and how can housing inequality for young people be improved?Why are some countries better than others at providing affordable housing for the next generation? What are the similarities and differences? What lessons can be drawn from cross-country comparisons?What political levers, such as subsidies, could be introduced to help the younger generation achieve more affordable and long-term housing security? Is the German Mietpreisbremse a successful instrument for this and how does it affect the young generation?Planet vs. people: It is often suggested that the solution to the housing crisis is to build more homes, but this raises the question of encroaching on green spaces and the environmental impact that this implies. How can that tension be resolved? How can urbanisation and the housing market become more environmentally friendly?Another solution is to use existing housing stock more efficiently. Can government policy help to bring this about, for example by incentivising the fuller occupation of large houses with unused spare bedrooms, or by discouraging the ownership of second homes through higher taxation? What is the potential of new forms of housing, such as shared housing, multi-generational housing, homeshare (housing for help)?How does homelessness affect young people in particular and how can it be combated?How can those who work in the media be encouraged to address this topic?Submission RequirementsSubmissions will be accepted until 31 December 2019.Articles may be submitted electronically through the IGJR homepage (see “Submissions”).Articles should be no more than 30,000 characters in length (including spaces but excluding bibliography, figures, photographs and tables). For details, see the author guidelines: http://www.igjr.org/ojs/igjr_doc/Author_Guidelines.pdfDemography PrizeNote that this topic is closely related to the subject of the next Demography Prize promoted by the Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG) and the Intergenerational Foundation (IF). The prize is endowed with 10,000€ and has 1 December 2019 as its deadline. Young researchers may also wish to participate in this essay competition, and it is hoped that this edition of the IGJR will contain a selection of the best prize submissions in English. More information is available on www.if.org.uk under >Research >Prizes and on www.intergenerationaljustice.org under >Academic Awards >Demography Prize.ReferencesEurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436. Recommended literatureDorling, Danny (2015): All That is Solid: How the Great Housing Disaster Defines Our Times, and What We Can Do About It. London: Allen Lane.Dustmann, Christian / Fitzenberger, Bernd / Zimmerman, Markus (2018): Housing Expenditures and Income Inequality, Cream Discussion Paper 16/18, London: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration, URL: http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_16_18.pdf. Viewed 24 October 2018.Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Eurostat (2015): Housing cost overburden rate. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvho07a&lang=en. Viewed 27 September 2018.Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.Hills, John / Cunliffe, Jack / Obolenskaya, Polina / Karagiannaki, Eleni (2015): Falling behind, getting ahead: the changing structure of inequality in the UK, 2007-2013. Social Policy in Cold Climate. London: LSE.Leach, Jeremy / Broeks, Miriam / Østenvik, Kristin / Kingman, David (2016): European Intergenerational Fairness Index: A Crisis for the Young. London: Intergenerational Foundation: http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/European-Intergenerational-Fairness-Index_Final-2016.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Lennartz, Christian / Helbrecht, Ilse (2018): The housing careers of younger adults and intergenerational support in Germany’s ‘society of renters’. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 317-336.Morton, Alex (2013): Housing and Intergenerational Fairness. London: Policy Exchange.National Housing Federation (2014): Broken Market, Broken Dreams. London: NHF.Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.Rugg, Julie J. / Quilgars, Deborah (2015): Young People and Housing: A Review of the Present Policy and Practice Landscape. In: Youth and Policy. Issue 114.Shaw, Randy (2018): Generation Priced Out. Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America, Oakland, CA: University of California Press.Shelter (2010): The Human Cost: How the Lack of Affordable Housing Impacts on All Aspects of Life. London: Shelter
IGJR 1/2020: Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?
No full textThe Intergenerational Justice Review is a peer-reviewed English language journal, reflecting the current state of research on intergenerational justice. The IGJR publishes articles from humanities, social sciences, and international law. The journal is released biannually and employs a double-blind peer review process. Its editorial board consists of about 50 internationally renowned experts from ten different countries. IGJR is indexed under Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The topic of issue 1/2020 (which is planned to be the first part of a double issue) will be“Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?”We welcome submissions to the issue 1/2020 that analyse the housing situation of the young generation.Topic outlineIn many European countries, and especially in large cities and university towns, affordable housing is a pressing and sometimes explosive issue. In the debate about such questions as home ownership or rent increase caps (Mietpreisbremse – German: rent brakes), the intergenerational perspective is often forgotten. But different generations are affected in noticeably different ways. Rising rent and purchase prices and the failure of housing construction programmes make it ever more difficult for young people to access the housing market. The quality of housing is a key factor in living standards and wellbeing, as well as an integral element of social integration, yet in 2014 a total of 7.8% of young people in the European Union (aged between 15 and 29) were in severe housing need, 25.7% of the young people in the EU lived in overcrowded households, and 13.6% lived in households that spent 40% or more of their equivalised disposable income on housing (Eurostat 2016).In response to the 2008/9 financial crisis, government programmes for public and social housing aimed at the poorer parts of the population were cut back, leading to diminishing access to affordable housing, especially in urbanised areas. For young people, this means that they have to pay higher rents. Today, therefore, they often live longer in their parental homes, or in the private rental sector, than previous generations (Ronald/Lennartz 2018).What is often referred to as a “housing crisis” can certainly be seen as a question of intergenerational justice, because the baby boomers had easier access to housing or to the means to finance it. Today, the baby boomer generation benefits from housing inequality in two ways: through property values and rental income. At the same time, with pension systems under pressure because of ageing populations, the ownership of residential property has become an important component of old-age provision (Helbrecht/Geisenkauser 2012).Younger generations, on the other hand, are disadvantaged in two respects: today’s increased demand leads to further pressure on the housing market in the low-price segment, which in turn leads to an increase in the rent burden for lower and middle income groups, and also makes the purchase of residential property more difficult. In many parts of Europe, such as the Southeast of the UK, in the 1980s the average cost of a first home was three to four times the annual average salary; today it can be ten or twelve times the annual average salary.From this perspective, it can certainly be argued that the housing market situation is not intergenerationally fair. And in many European countries, ownership of real estate has become a much greater source of wealth inequality between generations than salary differentials. This gloomy picture of housing and home ownership is, however, by no means universal. Statistics point to significant differences between countries, and international comparisons show that successful housing policies are possible. An EU comparison shows that the percentage of households managed by a person aged 18–29 who spends 40% or more of their disposable income on housing costs ranges from 1.3% (in Malta) to 45.4% (in Greece) (Leach et al. 2016). It is clear that some countries perform significantly better than others in providing affordable housing for the next generation.Articles could approach the topic through a broad range of questions, including:How did the housing crisis come to be and how can housing inequality for young people be improved?Why are some countries better than others at providing affordable housing for the next generation? What are the similarities and differences? What lessons can be drawn from cross-country comparisons?What political levers, such as subsidies, could be introduced to help the younger generation achieve more affordable and long-term housing security? Is the German Mietpreisbremse a successful instrument for this and how does it affect the young generation?Planet vs. people: It is often suggested that the solution to the housing crisis is to build more homes, but this raises the question of encroaching on green spaces and the environmental impact that this implies. How can that tension be resolved? How can urbanisation and the housing market become more environmentally friendly?Another solution is to use existing housing stock more efficiently. Can government policy help to bring this about, for example by incentivising the fuller occupation of large houses with unused spare bedrooms, or by discouraging the ownership of second homes through higher taxation?What is the potential of new forms of housing, such as shared housing, multi-generational housing, homeshare (housing for help)?How does homelessness affect young people in particular and how can it be combated?How can those who work in the media be encouraged to address this topic? Submission RequirementsSubmissions will be accepted until 31 December 2019.Articles may be submitted electronically through the IGJR homepage (see “Submissions”).Articles should be no more than 30,000 characters in length (including spaces but excluding bibliography, figures, photographs and tables). For details, see the author guidelines Demography Prize:Note that this topic is closely related to the subject of the next Demography Prize promoted by the Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG) and the Intergenerational Foundation (IF).The prize is endowed with 10,000€ and has 31 December 2019 as its deadline. Young researchers may also wish to participate in this essay competition, and it is hoped that this edition of the IGJR will contain a selection of the best prize submissions in English. More information will become available shortly on www.intergenerationaljustice.org and www.if.org.uk. ReferencesEurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.Recommended literatureDorling, Danny (2015): All That is Solid: How the Great Housing Disaster Defines Our Times, and What We Can Do About It. London: Allen Lane.Dustmann, Christian / Fitzenberger, Bernd / Zimmerman, Markus (2018): Housing Expenditures and Income Inequality, Cream Discussion Paper 16/18, London: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration, URL: http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_ uploads/CDP_16_18.pdf. Viewed 24 October 2018.Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Eurostat (2015): Housing cost overburden rate. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvho07a&lang=en. Viewed 27 September 2018.Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.Hills, John / Cunliffe, Jack / Obolenskaya, Polina / Karagiannaki, Eleni (2015): Falling behind, getting ahead: the changing structure of inequality in the UK, 2007-2013. Social Policy in Cold Climate. London: LSE.Leach, Jeremy / Broeks, Miriam / Østenvik, Kristin / Kingman, David (2016): European Intergenerational Fairness Index: A Crisis for the Young. London: Intergenerational Foundation: http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/European-Intergenerational-Fairness-Index_Final-2016.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.Lennartz, Christian / Helbrecht, Ilse (2018): The housing careers of younger adults and intergenerational support in Germany’s ‘society of renters’. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 317-336.Morton, Alex (2013): Housing and Intergenerational Fairness. London: Policy Exchange.National Housing Federation (2014): Broken Market, Broken Dreams. London: NHF.Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.Rugg, Julie J. / Quilgars, Deborah (2015): Young People and Housing: A Review of the Present Policy and Practice Landscape. In: Youth and Policy. Issue 114.Shaw, Randy (2018): Generation Priced Out. Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America, Oakland, CA: University of California Press.Shelter (2010): The Human Cost: How the Lack of Affordable Housing Impacts on All Aspects of Life. London: Shelter.
IGJR 1/2020: Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?
No full textThe Intergenerational Justice Review (www.igjr.org) is a peer-reviewed English language journal, reflecting the current state of research on intergenerational justice. The IGJR publishes articles from humanities, social sciences, and international law. The journal is released biannually and employs a double-blind peer review process. Its editorial board consists of about 50 internationally renowned experts from ten different countries. IGJR is indexed under Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
The topic of issue 1/2020 (which is planned to be the first part of a double issue) will be
“Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?”
We welcome submissions to the issue 1/2020 that analyse the housing situation of the young generation.
Topic outline
In many European countries, and especially in large cities and university towns, affordable housing is a pressing and sometimes explosive issue. In the debate about such questions as home ownership or rent increase caps (Mietpreisbremse – German: rent brakes), the intergenerational perspective is often forgotten. But different generations are affected in noticeably different ways. Rising rent and purchase prices and the failure of housing construction programmes make it ever more difficult for young people to access the housing market. The quality of housing is a key factor in living standards and wellbeing, as well as an integral element of social integration, yet in 2014 a total of 7.8% of young people in the European Union (aged between 15 and 29) were in severe housing need, 25.7% of the young people in the EU lived in overcrowded households, and 13.6% lived in households that spent 40% or more of their equivalised disposable income on housing (Eurostat 2016).
In response to the 2008/9 financial crisis, government programmes for public and social housing aimed at the poorer parts of the population were cut back, leading to diminishing access to affordable housing, especially in urbanised areas. For young people, this means that they have to pay higher rents. Today, therefore, they often live longer in their parental homes, or in the private rental sector, than previous generations (Ronald/Lennartz 2018).
What is often referred to as a “housing crisis” can certainly be seen as a question of intergenerational justice, because the baby boomers had easier access to housing or to the means to finance it. Today, the baby boomer generation benefits from housing inequality in two ways: through property values and rental income. At the same time, with pension systems under pressure because of ageing populations, the ownership of residential property has become an important component of old-age provision (Helbrecht/ Geisenkauser 2012).
Younger generations, on the other hand, are disadvantaged in two respects: today’s increased demand leads to further pressure on the housing market in the low-price segment, which in turn leads to an increase in the rent burden for lower and middle income groups, and also makes the purchase of residential property more difficult. In many parts of Europe, such as the Southeast of the UK, in the 1980s the average cost of a first home was three to four times the annual average salary; today it can be ten or twelve times the annual average salary.
From this perspective, it can certainly be argued that the housing market situation is not intergenerationally fair. And in many European countries, ownership of real estate has become a much greater source of wealth inequality between generations than salary differentials.
This gloomy picture of housing and home ownership is, however, by no means universal. Statistics point to significant differences between countries, and international comparisons show that successful housing policies are possible. An EU comparison shows that the percentage of households managed by a person aged 18–29 who spends 40% or more of their disposable income on housing costs ranges from 1.3% (in Malta) to 45.4% (in Greece) (Leach et al. 2016). It is clear that some countries perform significantly better than others in providing affordable housing for the next generation.
Articles could approach the topic through a broad range of questions, including:
• How did the housing crisis come to be and how can housing inequality for young people be improved?
• Why are some countries better than others at providing affordable housing for the next generation? What are the similarities and differences? What lessons can be drawn from cross-country comparisons?
• What political levers, such as subsidies, could be introduced to help the younger generation achieve more affordable and long-term housing security? Is the German Mietpreisbremse a successful instrument for this and how does it affect the young generation?
• Planet vs. people: It is often suggested that the solution to the housing crisis is to build more homes, but this raises the question of encroaching on green spaces and the environmental impact that this implies. How can that tension be resolved? How can urbanisation and the housing market become more environmentally friendly?
• Another solution is to use existing housing stock more efficiently. Can government policy help to bring this about, for example by incentivising the fuller occupation of large houses with unused spare bedrooms, or by discouraging the ownership of second homes through higher taxation? What is the potential of new forms of housing, such as shared housing, multi-generational housing, homeshare (housing for help)?
• How does homelessness affect young people in particular and how can it be combated?
• How can those who work in the media be encouraged to address this topic?
Submission Requirements
Submissions will be accepted until 31 December 2019.
Articles may be submitted electronically through the IGJR homepage (see “Submissions”).
Articles should be no more than 30,000 characters in length (including spaces but excluding bibliography, figures, photographs and tables). For details, see the author guidelines: http://www.igjr.org/ojs/igjr_doc/Author_Guidelines.pdf
Demography Prize
Note that this topic is closely related to the subject of the next Demography Prize promoted by the Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG) and the Intergenerational Foundation (IF). The prize is endowed with 10,000€ and has 1 December 2019 as its deadline. Young researchers may also wish to participate in this essay competition, and it is hoped that this edition of the IGJR will contain a selection of the best prize submissions in English. More information is available on www.if.org.uk under >Research >Prizes and on www.intergenerationaljustice.org under >Academic Awards >Demography Prize.
References
Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.
Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.
Recommended literature
Dorling, Danny (2015): All That is Solid: How the Great Housing Disaster Defines Our Times, and What We Can Do About It. London: Allen Lane.
Dustmann, Christian / Fitzenberger, Bernd / Zimmerman, Markus (2018): Housing Expenditures and Income Inequality, Cream Discussion Paper 16/18, London: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration, URL: http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_16_18.pdf. Viewed 24 October 2018.
Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Eurostat (2015): Housing cost overburden rate. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvho07a&lang=en. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.
Hills, John / Cunliffe, Jack / Obolenskaya, Polina / Karagiannaki, Eleni (2015): Falling behind, getting ahead: the changing structure of inequality in the UK, 2007-2013. Social Policy in Cold Climate. London: LSE.
Leach, Jeremy / Broeks, Miriam / Østenvik, Kristin / Kingman, David (2016): European Intergenerational Fairness Index: A Crisis for the Young. London: Intergenerational Foundation: http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/European-Intergenerational-Fairness-Index_Final-2016.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Lennartz, Christian / Helbrecht, Ilse (2018): The housing careers of younger adults and intergenerational support in Germany’s ‘society of renters’. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 317-336.
Morton, Alex (2013): Housing and Intergenerational Fairness. London: Policy Exchange.
National Housing Federation (2014): Broken Market, Broken Dreams. London: NHF.
Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.
Rugg, Julie J. / Quilgars, Deborah (2015): Young People and Housing: A Review of the Present Policy and Practice Landscape. In: Youth and Policy. Issue 114.
Shaw, Randy (2018): Generation Priced Out. Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America, Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Shelter (2010): The Human Cost: How the Lack of Affordable Housing Impacts on All Aspects of Life. London: Shelter
IGJR 1/2020: Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?
No full textThe Intergenerational Justice Review is a peer-reviewed English language journal, reflecting the current state of research on intergenerational justice. The IGJR publishes articles from humanities, social sciences, and international law. The journal is released biannually and employs a double-blind peer review process. Its editorial board consists of about 50 internationally renowned experts from ten different countries. IGJR is indexed under Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
The topic of issue 1/2020 (which is planned to be the first part of a double issue) will be
“Housing crisis: How can we improve the situation for young people?”
We welcome submissions to the issue 1/2020 that analyse the housing situation of the young generation.
Topic outline
In many European countries, and especially in large cities and university towns, affordable housing is a pressing and sometimes explosive issue. In the debate about such questions as home ownership or rent increase caps (Mietpreisbremse – German: rent brakes), the intergenerational perspective is often forgotten. But different generations are affected in noticeably different ways. Rising rent and purchase prices and the failure of housing construction programmes make it ever more difficult for young people to access the housing market. The quality of housing is a key factor in living standards and wellbeing, as well as an integral element of social integration, yet in 2014 a total of 7.8% of young people in the European Union (aged between 15 and 29) were in severe housing need, 25.7% of the young people in the EU lived in overcrowded households, and 13.6% lived in households that spent 40% or more of their equivalised disposable income on housing (Eurostat 2016).
In response to the 2008/9 financial crisis, government programmes for public and social housing aimed at the poorer parts of the population were cut back, leading to diminishing access to affordable housing, especially in urbanised areas. For young people, this means that they have to pay higher rents. Today, therefore, they often live longer in their parental homes, or in the private rental sector, than previous generations (Ronald/Lennartz 2018).
What is often referred to as a “housing crisis” can certainly be seen as a question of intergenerational justice, because the baby boomers had easier access to housing or to the means to finance it. Today, the baby boomer generation benefits from housing inequality in two ways: through property values and rental income. At the same time, with pension systems under pressure because of ageing populations, the ownership of residential property has become an important component of old-age provision (Helbrecht/Geisenkauser 2012).
Younger generations, on the other hand, are disadvantaged in two respects: today’s increased demand leads to further pressure on the housing market in the low-price segment, which in turn leads to an increase in the rent burden for lower and middle income groups, and also makes the purchase of residential property more difficult. In many parts of Europe, such as the Southeast of the UK, in the 1980s the average cost of a first home was three to four times the annual average salary; today it can be ten or twelve times the annual average salary.
From this perspective, it can certainly be argued that the housing market situation is not intergenerationally fair. And in many European countries, ownership of real estate has become a much greater source of wealth inequality between generations than salary differentials. This gloomy picture of housing and home ownership is, however, by no means universal. Statistics point to significant differences between countries, and international comparisons show that successful housing policies are possible. An EU comparison shows that the percentage of households managed by a person aged 18–29 who spends 40% or more of their disposable income on housing costs ranges from 1.3% (in Malta) to 45.4% (in Greece) (Leach et al. 2016). It is clear that some countries perform significantly better than others in providing affordable housing for the next generation.
Articles could approach the topic through a broad range of questions, including:
• How did the housing crisis come to be and how can housing inequality for young people be improved?
• Why are some countries better than others at providing affordable housing for the next generation? What are the similarities and differences? What lessons can be drawn from cross-country comparisons?
• What political levers, such as subsidies, could be introduced to help the younger generation achieve more affordable and long-term housing security? Is the German Mietpreisbremse a successful instrument for this and how does it affect the young generation?
• Planet vs. people: It is often suggested that the solution to the housing crisis is to build more homes, but this raises the question of encroaching on green spaces and the environmental impact that this implies. How can that tension be resolved? How can urbanisation and the housing market become more environmentally friendly?
• Another solution is to use existing housing stock more efficiently. Can government policy help to bring this about, for example by incentivising the fuller occupation of large houses with unused spare bedrooms, or by discouraging the ownership of second homes through higher taxation?
• What is the potential of new forms of housing, such as shared housing, multi-generational housing, homeshare (housing for help)?
• How does homelessness affect young people in particular and how can it be combated?
• How can those who work in the media be encouraged to address this topic?
Submission Requirements
Submissions will be accepted until 31 December 2019.
Articles may be submitted electronically through the IGJR homepage (see “Submissions”).
Articles should be no more than 30,000 characters in length (including spaces but excluding bibliography, figures, photographs and tables). For details, see the author guidelines
Demography Prize:
Note that this topic is closely related to the subject of the next Demography Prize promoted by the Foundation for the Rights of Future Generations (FRFG) and the Intergenerational Foundation (IF).
The prize is endowed with 10,000€ and has 31 December 2019 as its deadline. Young researchers may also wish to participate in this essay competition, and it is hoped that this edition of the IGJR will contain a selection of the best prize submissions in English. More information will become available shortly on www.intergenerationaljustice.org and www.if.org.uk.
References
Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.
Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.
Recommended literature
Dorling, Danny (2015): All That is Solid: How the Great Housing Disaster Defines Our Times, and What We Can Do About It. London: Allen Lane.
Dustmann, Christian / Fitzenberger, Bernd / Zimmerman, Markus (2018): Housing Expenditures and Income Inequality, Cream Discussion Paper 16/18, London: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration, URL: http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_ uploads/CDP_16_18.pdf. Viewed 24 October 2018.
Eurostat (2016): Young people – housing conditions, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/46039.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Eurostat (2015): Housing cost overburden rate. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvho07a&lang=en. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Helbrecht, Ilse / Geilenheuser, Tim (2012): Demographischer Wandel, Generationeneffekte und Wohnungsmarktentwicklung: Wohneigentum als Altersvorsorge? In: Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 70 (5), 425–436.
Hills, John / Cunliffe, Jack / Obolenskaya, Polina / Karagiannaki, Eleni (2015): Falling behind, getting ahead: the changing structure of inequality in the UK, 2007-2013. Social Policy in Cold Climate. London: LSE.
Leach, Jeremy / Broeks, Miriam / Østenvik, Kristin / Kingman, David (2016): European Intergenerational Fairness Index: A Crisis for the Young. London: Intergenerational Foundation: http://www.if.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/European-Intergenerational-Fairness-Index_Final-2016.pdf. Viewed 27 September 2018.
Lennartz, Christian / Helbrecht, Ilse (2018): The housing careers of younger adults and intergenerational support in Germany’s ‘society of renters’. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 317-336.
Morton, Alex (2013): Housing and Intergenerational Fairness. London: Policy Exchange.
National Housing Federation (2014): Broken Market, Broken Dreams. London: NHF.
Ronald, Richard / Lennartz, Christian (2018): Housing careers, intergenerational support and family relations. In: Housing Studies, 33 (2), 147-159.
Rugg, Julie J. / Quilgars, Deborah (2015): Young People and Housing: A Review of the Present Policy and Practice Landscape. In: Youth and Policy. Issue 114.
Shaw, Randy (2018): Generation Priced Out. Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America, Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Shelter (2010): The Human Cost: How the Lack of Affordable Housing Impacts on All Aspects of Life. London: Shelter.
Realising the geo/graphic landscape of the everyday: a practice led investigation into an interdisciplinary geo/graphic design process
No full textThis research proposes that the ‘geo/graphic’ design process—an original synthesis of cultural geographic and graphic design theory and practice—offers much to geographers and graphic designers in relation to the understanding and representation of place, and the potential of print based graphic design to create interactive, multi-linear spaces of exploration for the reader.
The understanding and representation of place is a central issue within cultural geography, with place itself a complex notion defined in contemporary geographic terms as ongoing and relational. This problematises both understanding and representation, as places, in a sense, are never ‘fixed’. Addressing this, and the contention that much of place evades representation, many geographers have begun to use methods that site the researcher, and their understanding, in more embodied, experiential ways within place, and are drawing on ‘creative’ methods such as film-making or sound recording. Yet, the predominant representation of place within geography remains the academic text, with few attempts to explore the communicative possibilities of type and image in this context. So, the pages of academic journals remain conventional, though research methods develop in multi-sensory ways. This research bridges the apparent divide between methods of exploring and representing place, and in doing so positions the graphic designer as researcher and develops a process that engages with the understanding and representation of place in a holistic way. Foregrounding graphic design practice, it highlights design interventions that re-situate the page as an experiential place.
A qualitative, naturalistic and reflective methodological approach is taken, drawing on social science methods and design practice. Ethnographic methods inspire a series of print based design test projects, each conveying a particular version of the London borough of Hackney—the testing ground for the research. Analysis of the design test projects, establishes key elements of the research and practice, thus articulating the specifics of the ‘geo/graphic’ design process
A constructivist account of varieties of capitalism : state interventions into naïve theories of British and German home ownership and mortgage markets
No full textThis thesis offers a constructivist framework to set out political features in capitalist
diversity that the current literatures on „Varieties of Capitalism‟ and „Comparative
Capitalisms‟ have not fully shed light into so far. Taking these scholarly contributions
as a starting point, I argue that their investigations are able to highlight the
distributional outcomes in terms of which actors relatively benefit from a particular
socio-economic setting. However, that they have difficulties to point to the political
aspects of different models of capitalism that relate to their constitutive nature. I then
suggest a method that is able to underline how the very understandings of the
individual economic subject and of the state are themselves political as their
definitions marginalise alternatives ways to make sense of these economic concepts.
Starting from the indeterminacy of the human mind and the theoretically many ways
to interpret the lived environment according to sets of „naïve theories‟, it builds on the
recent developments in constructivist institutionalism to present an account that puts
the individual-state relationship at its core. As such, it breaks with the focus on
production prevalent in the literature, and enables analysis of the normative depiction
of a particular ideal-typical type of economic subject that then engages with consumer
markets. What becomes essential is the exact ways in which a particular
understanding of the state in the eyes of policy-makers leads to the facilitation of
certain definitions of economic agency and market mechanisms, and the exclusion of
their alternatives. The empirical chapters then apply this framework to the cases of the
British and German home ownership and mortgage markets (1997-2007) to explore
the discursive framing patterns that were put forward to legitimate a particular
definition of the ideal-typical home owner and mortgagee in these two economies.
Through the study of parliamentary debates, the findings demonstrate not only that
differences exist in the conceptualisations of the economic subject, but hence also the
political character of such differences as excluding each other. At the same time, such
a process is shown to be deeply political in terms of the policy instruments that are
not considered due to particular taken-for-granted conceptions of policy-makers
themselves. In short, this constructivist account showcases the multiplicity of political
aspects with regards to state interventions in contemporary capitalist economies
