Institutionelle rammer for ejer-, lejer- og andelsboliger i Danmark

Student thesis: Master thesis (including HD thesis)

  • Morten Sax Nielsen
Travelling by train, passing through the Danish countryside, it appears that no part of the country is untouched by human activity. In the golden seas of cornfields, you´ll find islands of green with farms in their centres. A closer look may reveal details of daily life in the country this country of islands. One island breezes of activity - busily producing agriculture products on an ever increasing scale while others are abandoned by its previous inhabitants, the property having been sold to an enterprising neighbour, growing and growing. What makes these changes necessary? Some say its coursed by the globalization, where the worlds big cities compete with each other to achieve a better position in an the international web of cities, in order to attract international investment, getting bigger, expanding and growing. The way to go is to make the society more effectient and cost effective. The policy has changed the law has been changed. The purpose of the law of spatial planning has been altered. Now it is no longer policy to bring the growth to every part of the country, the new policy is to create competitive big cities, from where the wealth and growth will spread all over the country. But first, the cities must provide facilities attractive to international companies - science, infrastructure, proper housing and leisure. The vision is to change the production from high volume to high value, because the traditional high volume production is no longer competitive. Now it is information technology and other product developed through science. This Project The preconditions are spatial planning and investment. However, this project stresses out the need to control planning and investment in property. The project presents case stories about the consequences of housing policy to illustrate insufficiency due to planning and policy. The first case story illustrates how the political party Socialdemokratiet saved the municipal of Copenhagen from economic disaster by selling out the counsel house stock to better-off tenants on terms similar to the party policy: The tenants shared-ownership (andelsboligforeninger). The second case stories is about how government investments are not used effective and therefore do not provide for equilibrium in the housing market. Consequences of shared-ownership At first, the scientific research has proven that this kind of ownership seems to exclude the low-income groups and handicapped citizens. After the sale, the municipal faced an increasing group of homeless people without sufficient available apartments to solve the problem. The homeless were advised to try their luck in the private housing marked. In a television documentary, the effect of the sell-out where presented to the public. While following the homeless Mr. Hjortshøj - a grey area of the housing market surfaced. Ironically, this part showed that the municipal owned apartment was accessible for a large illegal fee. This was also the case when he tried to buy a share in shared-owned houses, he explained. In theory the shared-ownership is a democratic form of ownership, but it does not mean it differs from traditional private property rights. it does not solve the housing problem, and it does not provide an open market with perfect information, on the contrary the market condition became aggravated and even more impenetrable because the shares were not brought out for sale in the open market. Government investments The second case story illustrates how government investments are wasted. The government consist of two political parties - Venstre and Konservative representing the right wing in Danish politics. The government wants to increase effectiveness in public administration and investments. They also mean to improve the house stock and encourage building societies and private developers to build more houses. To create this incitentive the government changes the law and reserved a billion kroner for tax deductions available to house builders. In North Jutland initiative was taken, and houses were build without consideringe the market situation. In fact, there was no need for more housing in North Jutland, on the contrary, there was a surplus of houses, impossible to rent out, and in the same area houses were demolished. Because of the closing of the local shipyard, the inhabitants had moved to other places looking for work. While this was going on, the government tried to encourage at building project further south in Aalborg by reserving a large amount of government money (a tax deduction). The municipality of Aalborg wisely refused this offer as they also had sufficient of housing. In conclusion, the case stories shows, that the government solution to the housing problem is ineffective. In some cases it may leave the municipality worse off. The problem seems lie with the allocation of investments. The housing stock investment do not provide allocations where needed. This project argues, that reasonsfor this must be linked to the characteristic of houses, they are in any way private property. Stating this argument, it now becomes clear that legal construction of private property is a key to solve the problem. Institutional framework Previously it was suggested that there are several kinds of ownership arrangement, and that government was in favour for shared-ownership – however this arrangement does not promote a perfect market condition – although it is possible to support one specific type of property arrangement. It leads to another argument, the existence of institutional frameworks for different types of property: At first, the traditional private property, secondly the shared property and a thirdly the public housing and so on (The arrangement are not unlimited within the law). Each framework provides for its property arrangement. They have different characteristics and different ways of responding to demands. Although they all exist and operate in the same market, they respond differently to changes. The nature of institutional framework must be taken into consideration when urban development is needed. The features of institutional framework are presented here as material law (constitutions of property rights), the behaviour of organisation and agents, and economic incitements. The importance of institutional framework is now explained. The institutional framework can be counted for its ability to attract investments, but it does not explain why social housing are build in North Jutland while there exists a scarcity of housing in Copenhagen. The question must be directed to the area of spatial planning. Spatial Planning In Denmark the spatial planning is performed on a region and a local level, but not in a national scale. After each new election to parliament, the (new) governments planning department has to suggest some ideas for spatial planning, but in reality the national planning is the sum of regional planning. The local planning is performed by each municipality. The planning tool is very much described as simply pointing out the future use of areas. It does not change the present use of the property, but limits the future possibilities to altering the use. The local plans have to be in accordance with the principal of region plans. This few characteristics are sufficient in order to realize the lack of control. The municipals compete with each other in order to attract investments. They have their own interests in mind. When houses are built in North Jutland instead of places where houses are in demand, it could be explained by local interests and behaviour. Obviously, it must be much more attractive to build houses where houses are in demand, but it is not unlikely that these places has a scarcity of available land. Other consideration may come to mind. The point is, that planning in it self does not secure investment, it only makes it possible to allocate. Final conclusion The aim of the project is to suggest another view on spatial planning. While institutional frameworks not only secure but also promote investment, the spatial planning makes it possible to allocate physically. In final conclusion: Travelling by train, passing through the Danish countryside, it appears that no part of the country is untouched by human activity. In the golden seas of cornfields, you´ll find islands of green with farms in their centres. A closer look may reveal details of daily life in the country this country of islands. One island breezes of activity - busily producing agriculture products on an ever increasing scale while others are abandoned by its previous inhabitants, the property having been sold to an enterprising neighbour, growing and growing. What makes these changes necessary? Some say its coursed by the globalization, where the worlds big cities compete with each other to achieve a better position in an the international web of cities, in order to attract international investment, getting bigger, expanding and growing. The way to go is to make the society more effectient and cost effective. The policy has changed the law has been changed. The purpose of the law of spatial planning has been altered. Now it is no longer policy to bring the growth to every part of the country, the new policy is to create competitive big cities, from where the wealth and growth will spread all over the country. But first, the cities must provide facilities attractive to international companies - science, infrastructure, proper housing and leisure. The vision is to change the production from high volume to high value, because the traditional high volume production is no longer competitive. Now it is information technology and other product developed through science. This Project The preconditions are spatial planning and investment. However, this project stresses out the need to control planning and investment in property. The project presents case stories about the consequences of housing policy to illustrate insufficiency due to planning and policy. The first case story illustrates how the political party Socialdemokratiet saved the municipal of Copenhagen from economic disaster by selling out the counsel house stock to better-off tenants on terms similar to the party policy: The tenants shared-ownership (andelsboligforeninger). The second case stories is about how government investments are not used effective and therefore do not provide for equilibrium in the housing market. Consequences of shared-ownership At first, the scientific research has proven that this kind of ownership seems to exclude the low-income groups and handicapped citizens. After the sale, the municipal faced an increasing group of homeless people without sufficient available apartments to solve the problem. The homeless were advised to try their luck in the private housing marked. In a television documentary, the effect of the sell-out where presented to the public. While following the homeless Mr. Hjortshøj - a grey area of the housing market surfaced. Ironically, this part showed that the municipal owned apartment was accessible for a large illegal fee. This was also the case when he tried to buy a share in shared-owned houses, he explained. In theory the shared-ownership is a democratic form of ownership, but it does not mean it differs from traditional private property rights. it does not solve the housing problem, and it does not provide an open market with perfect information, on the contrary the market condition became aggravated and even more impenetrable because the shares were not brought out for sale in the open market. Government investments The second case story illustrates how government investments are wasted. The government consist of two political parties - Venstre and Konservative representing the right wing in Danish politics. The government wants to increase effectiveness in public administration and investments. They also mean to improve the house stock and encourage building societies and private developers to build more houses. To create this incitentive the government changes the law and reserved a billion kroner for tax deductions available to house builders. In North Jutland initiative was taken, and houses were build without consideringe the market situation. In fact, there was no need for more housing in North Jutland, on the contrary, there was a surplus of houses, impossible to rent out, and in the same area houses were demolished. Because of the closing of the local shipyard, the inhabitants had moved to other places looking for work. While this was going on, the government tried to encourage at building project further south in Aalborg by reserving a large amount of government money (a tax deduction). The municipality of Aalborg wisely refused this offer as they also had sufficient of housing. In conclusion, the case stories shows, that the government solution to the housing problem is ineffective. In some cases it may leave the municipality worse off. The problem seems lie with the allocation of investments. The housing stock investment do not provide allocations where needed. This project argues, that reasonsfor this must be linked to the characteristic of houses, they are in any way private property. Stating this argument, it now becomes clear that legal construction of private property is a key to solve the problem. Institutional framework Previously it was suggested that there are several kinds of ownership arrangement, and that government was in favour for shared-ownership – however this arrangement does not promote a perfect market condition – although it is possible to support one specific type of property arrangement. It leads to another argument, the existence of institutional frameworks for different types of property: At first, the traditional private property, secondly the shared property and a thirdly the public housing and so on (The arrangement are not unlimited within the law). Each framework provides for its property arrangement. They have different characteristics and different ways of responding to demands. Although they all exist and operate in the same market, they respond differently to changes. The nature of institutional framework must be taken into consideration when urban development is needed. The features of institutional framework are presented here as material law (constitutions of property rights), the behaviour of organisation and agents, and economic incitements. The importance of institutional framework is now explained. The institutional framework can be counted for its ability to attract investments, but it does not explain why social housing are build in North Jutland while there exists a scarcity of housing in Copenhagen. The question must be directed to the area of spatial planning. Spatial Planning In Denmark the spatial planning is performed on a region and a local level, but not in a national scale. After each new election to parliament, the (new) governments planning department has to suggest some ideas for spatial planning, but in reality the national planning is the sum of regional planning. The local planning is performed by each municipality. The planning tool is very much described as simply pointing out the future use of areas. It does not change the present use of the property, but limits the future possibilities to altering the use. The local plans have to be in accordance with the principal of region plans. This few characteristics are sufficient in order to realize the lack of control. The municipals compete with each other in order to attract investments. They have their own interests in mind. When houses are built in North Jutland instead of places where houses are in demand, it could be explained by local interests and behaviour. Obviously, it must be much more attractive to build houses where houses are in demand, but it is not unlikely that these places has a scarcity of available land. Other consideration may come to mind. The point is, that planning in it self does not secure investment, it only makes it possible to allocate. Final conclusion The aim of the project is to suggest another view on spatial planning. While institutional frameworks not only secure but also promote investment, the spatial planning makes it possible to allocate physically. In final conclusion: Travelling by train, passing through the Danish countryside, it appears that no part of the country is untouched by human activity. In the golden seas of cornfields, you´ll find islands of green with farms in their centres. A closer look may reveal details of daily life in the country this country of islands. One island breezes of activity - busily producing agriculture products on an ever increasing scale while others are abandoned by its previous inhabitants, the property having been sold to an enterprising neighbour, growing and growing. What makes these changes necessary? Some say its coursed by the globalization, where the worlds big cities compete with each other to achieve a better position in an the international web of cities, in order to attract international investment, getting bigger, expanding and growing. The way to go is to make the society more effectient and cost effective. The policy has changed the law has been changed. The purpose of the law of spatial planning has been altered. Now it is no longer policy to bring the growth to every part of the country, the new policy is to create competitive big cities, from where the wealth and growth will spread all over the country. But first, the cities must provide facilities attractive to international companies - science, infrastructure, proper housing and leisure. The vision is to change the production from high volume to high value, because the traditional high volume production is no longer competitive. Now it is information technology and other product developed through science. This Project The preconditions are spatial planning and investment. However, this project stresses out the need to control planning and investment in property. The project presents case stories about the consequences of housing policy to illustrate insufficiency due to planning and policy. The first case story illustrates how the political party Socialdemokratiet saved the municipal of Copenhagen from economic disaster by selling out the counsel house stock to better-off tenants on terms similar to the party policy: The tenants shared-ownership (andelsboligforeninger). The second case stories is about how government investments are not used effective and therefore do not provide for equilibrium in the housing market. Consequences of shared-ownership At first, the scientific research has proven that this kind of ownership seems to exclude the low-income groups and handicapped citizens. After the sale, the municipal faced an increasing group of homeless people without sufficient available apartments to solve the problem. The homeless were advised to try their luck in the private housing marked. In a television documentary, the effect of the sell-out where presented to the public. While following the homeless Mr. Hjortshøj - a grey area of the housing market surfaced. Ironically, this part showed that the municipal owned apartment was accessible for a large illegal fee. This was also the case when he tried to buy a share in shared-owned houses, he explained. In theory the shared-ownership is a democratic form of ownership, but it does not mean it differs from traditional private property rights. it does not solve the housing problem, and it does not provide an open market with perfect information, on the contrary the market condition became aggravated and even more impenetrable because the shares were not brought out for sale in the open market. Government investments The second case story illustrates how government investments are wasted. The government consist of two political parties - Venstre and Konservative representing the right wing in Danish politics. The government wants to increase effectiveness in public administration and investments. They also mean to improve the house stock and encourage building societies and private developers to build more houses. To create this incitentive the government changes the law and reserved a billion kroner for tax deductions available to house builders. In North Jutland initiative was taken, and houses were build without consideringe the market situation. In fact, there was no need for more housing in North Jutland, on the contrary, there was a surplus of houses, impossible to rent out, and in the same area houses were demolished. Because of the closing of the local shipyard, the inhabitants had moved to other places looking for work. While this was going on, the government tried to encourage at building project further south in Aalborg by reserving a large amount of government money (a tax deduction). The municipality of Aalborg wisely refused this offer as they also had sufficient of housing. In conclusion, the case stories shows, that the government solution to the housing problem is ineffective. In some cases it may leave the municipality worse off. The problem seems lie with the allocation of investments. The housing stock investment do not provide allocations where needed. This project argues, that reasonsfor this must be linked to the characteristic of houses, they are in any way private property. Stating this argument, it now becomes clear that legal construction of private property is a key to solve the problem. Institutional framework Previously it was suggested that there are several kinds of ownership arrangement, and that government was in favour for shared-ownership – however this arrangement does not promote a perfect market condition – although it is possible to support one specific type of property arrangement. It leads to another argument, the existence of institutional frameworks for different types of property: At first, the traditional private property, secondly the shared property and a thirdly the public housing and so on (The arrangement are not unlimited within the law). Each framework provides for its property arrangement. They have different characteristics and different ways of responding to demands. Although they all exist and operate in the same market, they respond differently to changes. The nature of institutional framework must be taken into consideration when urban development is needed. The features of institutional framework are presented here as material law (constitutions of property rights), the behaviour of organisation and agents, and economic incitements. The importance of institutional framework is now explained. The institutional framework can be counted for its ability to attract investments, but it does not explain why social housing are build in North Jutland while there exists a scarcity of housing in Copenhagen. The question must be directed to the area of spatial planning. Spatial Planning In Denmark the spatial planning is performed on a region and a local level, but not in a national scale. After each new election to parliament, the (new) governments planning department has to suggest some ideas for spatial planning, but in reality the national planning is the sum of regional planning. The local planning is performed by each municipality. The planning tool is very much described as simply pointing out the future use of areas. It does not change the present use of the property, but limits the future possibilities to altering the use. The local plans have to be in accordance with the principal of region plans. This few characteristics are sufficient in order to realize the lack of control. The municipals compete with each other in order to attract investments. They have their own interests in mind. When houses are built in North Jutland instead of places where houses are in demand, it could be explained by local interests and behaviour. Obviously, it must be much more attractive to build houses where houses are in demand, but it is not unlikely that these places has a scarcity of available land. Other consideration may come to mind. The point is, that planning in it self does not secure investment, it only makes it possible to allocate. Final conclusion The aim of the project is to suggest another view on spatial planning. While institutional frameworks not only secure but also promote investment, the spatial planning makes it possible to allocate physically. In final conclusion: Travelling by train, passing through the Danish countryside, it appears that no part of the country is untouched by human activity. In the golden seas of cornfields, you´ll find islands of green with farms in their centres. A closer look may reveal details of daily life in the country this country of islands. One island breezes of activity - busily producing agriculture products on an ever increasing scale while others are abandoned by its previous inhabitants, the property having been sold to an enterprising neighbour, growing and growing. What makes these changes necessary? Some say its coursed by the globalization, where the worlds big cities compete with each other to achieve a better position in an the international web of cities, in order to attract international investment, getting bigger, expanding and growing. The way to go is to make the society more effectient and cost effective. The policy has changed the law has been changed. The purpose of the law of spatial planning has been altered. Now it is no longer policy to bring the growth to every part of the country, the new policy is to create competitive big cities, from where the wealth and growth will spread all over the country. But first, the cities must provide facilities attractive to international companies - science, infrastructure, proper housing and leisure. The vision is to change the production from high volume to high value, because the traditional high volume production is no longer competitive. Now it is information technology and other product developed through science. This Project The preconditions are spatial planning and investment. However, this project stresses out the need to control planning and investment in property. The project presents case stories about the consequences of housing policy to illustrate insufficiency due to planning and policy. The first case story illustrates how the political party Socialdemokratiet saved the municipal of Copenhagen from economic disaster by selling out the counsel house stock to better-off tenants on terms similar to the party policy: The tenants shared-ownership (andelsboligforeninger). The second case stories is about how government investments are not used effective and therefore do not provide for equilibrium in the housing market. Consequences of shared-ownership At first, the scientific research has proven that this kind of ownership seems to exclude the low-income groups and handicapped citizens. After the sale, the municipal faced an increasing group of homeless people without sufficient available apartments to solve the problem. The homeless were advised to try their luck in the private housing marked. In a television documentary, the effect of the sell-out where presented to the public. While following the homeless Mr. Hjortshøj - a grey area of the housing market surfaced. Ironically, this part showed that the municipal owned apartment was accessible for a large illegal fee. This was also the case when he tried to buy a share in shared-owned houses, he explained. In theory the shared-ownership is a democratic form of ownership, but it does not mean it differs from traditional private property rights. it does not solve the housing problem, and it does not provide an open market with perfect information, on the contrary the market condition became aggravated and even more impenetrable because the shares were not brought out for sale in the open market. Government investments The second case story illustrates how government investments are wasted. The government consist of two political parties - Venstre and Konservative representing the right wing in Danish politics. The government wants to increase effectiveness in public administration and investments. They also mean to improve the house stock and encourage building societies and private developers to build more houses. To create this incitentive the government changes the law and reserved a billion kroner for tax deductions available to house builders. In North Jutland initiative was taken, and houses were build without consideringe the market situation. In fact, there was no need for more housing in North Jutland, on the contrary, there was a surplus of houses, impossible to rent out, and in the same area houses were demolished. Because of the closing of the local shipyard, the inhabitants had moved to other places looking for work. While this was going on, the government tried to encourage at building project further south in Aalborg by reserving a large amount of government money (a tax deduction). The municipality of Aalborg wisely refused this offer as they also had sufficient of housing. In conclusion, the case stories shows, that the government solution to the housing problem is ineffective. In some cases it may leave the municipality worse off. The problem seems lie with the allocation of investments. The housing stock investment do not provide allocations where needed. This project argues, that reasonsfor this must be linked to the characteristic of houses, they are in any way private property. Stating this argument, it now becomes clear that legal construction of private property is a key to solve the problem. Institutional framework Previously it was suggested that there are several kinds of ownership arrangement, and that government was in favour for shared-ownership – however this arrangement does not promote a perfect market condition – although it is possible to support one specific type of property arrangement. It leads to another argument, the existence of institutional frameworks for different types of property: At first, the traditional private property, secondly the shared property and a thirdly the public housing and so on (The arrangement are not unlimited within the law). Each framework provides for its property arrangement. They have different characteristics and different ways of responding to demands. Although they all exist and operate in the same market, they respond differently to changes. The nature of institutional framework must be taken into consideration when urban development is needed. The features of institutional framework are presented here as material law (constitutions of property rights), the behaviour of organisation and agents, and economic incitements. The importance of institutional framework is now explained. The institutional framework can be counted for its ability to attract investments, but it does not explain why social housing are build in North Jutland while there exists a scarcity of housing in Copenhagen. The question must be directed to the area of spatial planning. Spatial Planning In Denmark the spatial planning is performed on a region and a local level, but not in a national scale. After each new election to parliament, the (new) governments planning department has to suggest some ideas for spatial planning, but in reality the national planning is the sum of regional planning. The local planning is performed by each municipality. The planning tool is very much described as simply pointing out the future use of areas. It does not change the present use of the property, but limits the future possibilities to altering the use. The local plans have to be in accordance with the principal of region plans. This few characteristics are sufficient in order to realize the lack of control. The municipals compete with each other in order to attract investments. They have their own interests in mind. When houses are built in North Jutland instead of places where houses are in demand, it could be explained by local interests and behaviour. Obviously, it must be much more attractive to build houses where houses are in demand, but it is not unlikely that these places has a scarcity of available land. Other consideration may come to mind. The point is, that planning in it self does not secure investment, it only makes it possible to allocate.
LanguageDanish
Publication date2004
Number of pages140
Publishing institutionAalborg Universitet
ID: 6143029