Abstract

Having access to housing is considered a vital but also highly problematic aspect of ex-offenders’ reintegration process. To overcome the existing difficulties, Dutch ex-offenders are advised to apply for a so-called “certificate of housing urgency,” granting persons with urgent housing needs priority over others seeking affordable (social) housing. Using a holistic multimethod approach, this paper determines whether priority housing does indeed have the potential of becoming (part of) the solution to ex-offenders’ housing problems by examining the (implementation of) priority housing regulations in 45 Dutch municipalities. The study reveals that most regulations do not explicitly include or exclude ex-prisoners from receiving priority status. Whether an ex-offender qualifies for a priority status consequently often depends on decision-makers’ interpretation of the regulations. Interviews conducted with these decision-makers and analyzed in light of Michael Lipsky’s theory on street-level bureaucrats reveal that most enjoy a significant margin of discretion when assessing applications. As a result, ex-offenders’ chances of successfully obtaining a priority status primarily depend on the individual street-level bureaucrats’ style of rule application. It is concluded that whereas the Dutch priority housing system allows for tailored solutions to individual housing problems it offers little legal certainty to returning ex-offenders.

摘要

获得住房被认为是前罪犯重新融入社会过程中一个至关重要但也是非常成问题的方面。为了克服现有的困难，建议荷兰的前罪犯申请所谓的“住房紧迫性证明”，给予有紧急住房需求的人优先于寻求负担得起的（社会）住房的其他人。本文采用全面的多方法方法，通过检查荷兰 45 个城市的优先住房法规（实施情况），确定优先住房是否确实有可能成为（部分）解决前罪犯住房问题的方法。研究表明，大多数法规并未明确包括或排除前囚犯获得优先地位。因此，前罪犯是否有资格获得优先地位通常取决于决策者对法规的解释。与这些决策者进行的访谈并根据迈克尔利普斯基关于街头官僚的理论进行分析表明，大多数人在评估申请时享有很大的自由裁量权。因此，前罪犯成功获得优先地位的机会主要取决于个别街头官僚的规则应用风格。结论是，虽然荷兰的优先住房制度允许针对个人住房问题提供量身定制的解决方案，但它对返回的前罪犯几乎没有法律确定性。与这些决策者进行的访谈并根据迈克尔利普斯基关于街头官僚的理论进行分析表明，大多数人在评估申请时享有很大的自由裁量权。因此，前罪犯成功获得优先地位的机会主要取决于个别街头官僚的规则应用风格。结论是，虽然荷兰的优先住房制度允许针对个人住房问题提供量身定制的解决方案，但它对返回的前罪犯几乎没有法律确定性。与这些决策者进行的访谈并根据迈克尔利普斯基关于街头官僚的理论进行分析表明，大多数人在评估申请时享有很大的自由裁量权。因此，前罪犯成功获得优先地位的机会主要取决于个别街头官僚的规则应用风格。结论是，虽然荷兰的优先住房制度允许针对个人住房问题提供量身定制的解决方案，但它对返回的前罪犯几乎没有法律确定性。