In this article we discuss the role and position of different types of low income households in Dutch renewable energy transition processes using the concept of energy poverty. We explore which benefits and/or (dis)advantages (unintentionally) result from energy policies and regulations. And to what extent the distribution of these (dis)advantages benefit the position of different types of households. To this end we present an analytical perspective that enables us to evaluate renewable energy transition policies and governance on procedural and distributional aspects: paying attention to issues of recognition, equity and justice. The perspective draws on ideas in environmental justice literature and on ideas in social resilience literature. Combining these ideas in a new analytical framework proved to be useful in articulating some major policy challenges in relation to energy poverty in the Netherlands today.

This article examines the economic agenda of the Dutch Freedom Party. It finds that this party mixes left-wing and right-wing policy positions. This inconsistency can be understood through the group-based account of Ennser-Jedenastik (2016), which proposes that the welfare state agenda of radical right-wing populist parties can be understood in terms of populism, nativism and authoritarianism. Each of these elements is linked to a particular economic policy: economic nativism, which sees the economic interest of natives and foreigners as opposed; economic populism, which seeks to limit economic privileges for the elite; and economic authoritarianism, which sees the interests of deserving and undeserving poor as opposed. By using these different oppositions, radical right-wing populist parties can reconcile left-wing and right-wing positions.

During the last ten years, the private rental sector in the Netherlands has experienced a rapid growth. In the larger cities, this sector grew with 30 percent, mainly as a result of the large amount of private persons operating as small scale landlords (buy-to-let). This article reflects on the findings of a recent report on the nature of the buy-to-let sector in the Netherlands, carried out by Manuel Aalbers, Jelke Bosma, Rodrigo Fernandez and Cody Hochstenbach. This takes their findings as a starting point, and positions the Dutch private rental sector in an internationally comparative perspective. Furthermore, this article explains the rise of the buy-to-let sector not just from a housing market point of view, but from a welfare state perspective. In different European countries, the private rental sector plays a different role in the housing market, which impacts on the availability and affordability of housing in urban areas. Moreover, rental income for buy-to-let or small-scale private landlords can be seen as part of the provision of welfare. For some it is a pension arrangement, for others a speculative investment. This article reflects on the policy recommendations that Aalbers cum suis propose in their report. To what extent are their proposals able to increase the availability and affordability of housing, without undermining the livelihood of landlords for whom the rental incomes function as social security arrangement?

Over the last couple of decades, metropolitan areas around the world have been engaged in a multitude of initiatives aimed at upgrading urban infrastructure and services, in an effort to create better environmental, social and economic conditions and to enhance cities’ attractiveness and competitiveness. Reflecting these developments, many new categories of ‘cities’ have entered the policy discourse: ‘sustainable cities’; ‘green cities’; ‘digital cities’; ‘intelligent cities’; ‘smart cities’; ‘information cities’; ‘knowledge cities’; ‘resilient cities’; ‘eco-cities’; ‘low carbon cities’; ‘liveable cities’; and even combinations, such as ‘low carbon eco-cities’ and ‘ubiquitous eco-cities’. Each of these terms apparently seeks to capture and conceptualize key aspects of ongoing urban sustainability efforts. Closer examination, however, reveals that the terms are often used interchangeably by policy makers, planners and developers alike. In this article we examine the reflection of the wider policy debate in academic discourse. By subjecting the twelve most frequently encountered categories mentioned above to bibliometric analysis, we aim to identify the distinct conceptual perspectives harbored by each of them.

Sustainability, the question of how our system of prosperity could be maintained, is one of the main issues of the coming decades. To combine economic growth and a pleasant environment, society needs to scale back its resource use and the ensuing pressures on the environment, by a factor of five. The challenge is to do more with less; something for which there is no instant solution. The city is the place where this change will begin, not by ‘big’ government with ‘big’ plans, but by the energetic society. Citizens and the business community are motivated by their wish for a clean economy and a pleasant living environment. The rise of the information society has increased their ability to exchange knowledge and ideas, releasing creativity and creating new solutions. If city governments are to tap into the strength of society, they must embrace the initiatives and join citizens and business in the empowered deliberative search for sustainable solutions. The goal of a clean economy is within reach, but it demands comprehensive physical and cultural change, in which local initiatives may lead the cultural change towards a broad vision of a strong, sustainable society. A large role for government remains, but high quality, low carbon cities may be the winners of the future.