PhD | Thinkering with property rights provokes strong reactions
Anyone wanting to solve the housing crisis should not fixate solely on building homes, but should be willing to seriously tinker with property rights, says Eva Vermeulen. Her dissertation has led to some raised eyebrows. “I’m not saying that a touch of socialism is needed, but rather a touch of social thinking.”
It was only recently that Eva Vermeulen (32) defended her PhD thesis on a more socially oriented variant of property rights at the University of Amsterdam, yet it quickly sparked considerable controversy online. On right-wing news sites her suggestions were frequently compared to communism, and on X terms such as “socialist science” appeared repeatedly in discussions of her thesis.
Is a touch of socialism necessary to solve the housing crisis?
“No, that is not the point I am making. Socialism concerns the public ownership of the means of production. The social understanding of property that I discuss in my thesis is much more about the entire set of rules surrounding ownership, and how we can view that as an instrument to achieve certain goals. Private property fits perfectly well within that framework, including the private ownership of homes. I am not saying that we need a touch of socialism, but rather a touch of social thinking. We must think about the effects of private ownership on society, and I believe there are many ways to steer those effects in a more positive direction without immediately invoking socialism.”
I refer to the uproar that followed your dissertation. Marx, Engels and the Soviet Union were all dragged into the debate. What do you make of that criticism?
“I found it remarkable to see. This is the first time my PhD-research has received public attention, and you then see nuanced work being flattened into caricature. Those reactions stem from an emotion I can understand. Housing is incredibly important and, at present, ownership provides security of housing. If you then believe that I am saying the government wants to take your house away, I can understand your anger. But that is based on a misunderstanding, because that is not what I said.”
If we turn to the substance: what exactly does tinkering with property rights involve?
“Property rights consist of many different elements. There is the right of use and the right of exclusion, which establish that you may use the goods you own and decide who is allowed into your home. But there is also the right to income and the right to capital. By breaking down property rights into these different components I try to show that there are many dials you can turn to achieve certain outcomes. Everyone in the Netherlands should have a fair chance at housing, so the question is: which dials must we adjust to bring that about?”
And?
“Take the right to income from your home or the right to capital. I am not saying: abolish those, because then indeed you move towards communism. But we should examine, component by component, what we do and do not wish to protect. For example, when you add a dormer window or improve the sustainability of your home, those are investments that create value. The money earned from those improvements when the house is later sold should of course go to the owners.”
“But there is also capital created simply because the housing market is extremely tight. Speculative value driven by supply and demand, for which you need do nothing. That part of the increase in value could be limited, because it arises mainly from societal circumstances rather than from investment by the owner. And that money could be put to good use for social aims such as housing construction.”
Are there any more concrete policy recommendations?
“I do not give concrete policy recommendations, but in my thesis I provide a range of possible policy directions. We have now spoken about taxation, but there are other ways to limit capital gains from housing. The leasehold system used in some cities, for example, is another way of doing this. In that system the land is publicly owned while the buildings on it are privately owned. Homeowners pay an annual fee (“canon”) to the municipality, which transfers some income from the private to the public sphere.”
What about slumlords?
“When someone rents out a home, the property is used to generate income. In principle that is fine: it is good that renting is an option, because not everyone wants to own a home. But for so-called “slumlords” it truly becomes a business model. That is not inherently problematic, but due to the housing shortage they can sometimes demand such high rents that many people can barely afford them. That is where the problem lies.”
How do we curb that?
“In my thesis I explain that a balance must be struck between what is affordable for tenants and what is profitable for landlords. Those two must come together. I cannot name a precise amount, but there are many landlords for whom renting out is no longer attractive once their income is limited. Rent regulation can therefore lead private landlords to conclude that this market is no longer for them. In that case the role of housing associations becomes even more important, as they were created for precisely this task.”
If there is any group that would benefit from a less overheated housing market, it is students. How do your ideas help them?
“Incorporating distributive justice into property rights also raises the question: how do we wish to distribute? When it comes to access to housing, I argue for giving priority to people who in practice do not have living space. There are of course people living on the streets, but you can also be moving from friend to friend, or living with your parents while wanting to move out, as many students currently do. To help them, you might consider giving them priority in housing allocation. Municipalities already have instruments for this, such as allocation rules giving preference to groups with a local, economic or social connection, or points systems in which personal circumstances play a role. If the local situation calls for it, it does not seem unreasonable to include students in such schemes.”
