For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands

Abstract

While governments worldwide rely upon compact city policies to reduce land consumption from urban growth, recent studies have addressed the potential trade-off between densification and housing affordability. Concerns have been voiced that densification leads to a one-sided housing supply, structurally excluding low-income households. However, few studies address household income variation across densification projects, leaving us with a limited understanding of the circumstances under which exclusion occurs. To this end, we explore household incomes in densification projects between 2012 and 2020 in the Province of Utrecht, the Netherlands, where urban development is traditionally strongly regulated through active land policy. At the same time, current shifts towards a more deregulated housing market make for an interesting case. Exceptional access to detailed cadastral and census data allows us to identify densification projects and assign them a median household income each. We investigate the influence of location and transformation process on household incomes through regression analysis and conduct qualitative case studies of projects whose median income was highly mispredicted by the regression model. This allows us to integrate non-quantified factors, such as land ownership and public policy interventions, in explaining such interesting cases. For the Province of Utrecht, our study confirms that while households in densification projects earn significantly more than their neighbours, the range of incomes in densification projects is large. Project characteristics such as centrality, neighbourhood status and transformation process explain only a small share of this variance. For cases where median incomes are much lower than predicted by the model, public land ownership, in combination with inclusionary zoning, is essential in ensuring housing affordability. Our approach highlights the necessity of supplementing densification policies with measures that secure affordable housing.