Fear of densification often irrational
Researcher Che-Yuan Liang thinks that while many people oppose densification, they like the advantages that come with more housing in an area, such as more restaurants and better services. Photo: Mikael Wallerstedt
In connection with the EU elections, Uppsala residents will also have a chance to express their opinion on housing construction in the municipality. Researcher Che-Yuan Liang sees many advantages to building as previously planned, but believes the referendum will be coloured by a “not in my backyard” attitude.
On 9 June, Uppsala residents will have a chance to express their opinion in a referendum on where to build housing. The question is worded as follows:
Should Uppsala Municipality, in the comprehensive plan, decrease development in Uppsala city by planning for more housing in the urban areas along the Ostkustbanan (Storvreta, Vattholma and Skyttorp) and Dalabanan (Vänge and Järlåsa) railway lines?
Housing and urban researcher Che-Yuan Liang thinks it may be difficult for the average Uppsala resident to answer this question.
“In a way, it seems a little strange to me to hold a referendum on an issue about which the general public probably knows very little. This isn’t the sort of question that will galvanise voters – many are more likely to think the people working on these matters know best,” says Liang, Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Institute for Housing and Urban Research at Uppsala University.
He is a member of the steering group of Urban Lab, a research programme that has collaborated with the municipality and has some insight into work on the present comprehensive plan – the plan Uppsala residents will now be voting to perhaps change. Liang says this probably makes him biased, but in his opinion the basic proposal is well-considered and best – it is better to build in Uppsala city than in outlying urban areas. He lists a number of advantages: it is cheaper, better for the environment and Uppsala city is where most people want to live.
“I really see very few advantages to building outside the city.", says Che-Yuan Liang.
“I really see very few advantages to building outside the city, unless there are patches of nature in Uppsala city that are worth preserving, which might make it more difficult to find suitable land.”
What’s so bad about building in the outlying urban areas? Isn’t it a good thing to create opportunities to live out in the country too?
“Generally speaking, not many low-income families live in the country in Sweden and new construction in areas with shrinking populations leads to empty housing. In specific urban areas like Storvreta the population is not declining and new housing is planned there in the existing comprehensive plan as well. However, more new housing is not only cheaper but more useful in the city.”
Irrational fear of densification
Although the advantages of densifying the city itself are so obvious to Liang, he believes the local population may think otherwise. This is because of the “not in my backyard” phenomenon – an attitude that typically means accepting that new housing is built, but not if it happens in your own area.
“Nearly all economic psychology suggests that many people will vote against densification in the city. This applies especially to the adjacent neighbourhoods that would be affected. When there were plans to build in Bäcklösa, for example, there were big protests in the neighbouring area of Sunnersta.”
Before upcoming building projects, there is often anxiety that it will lower the value of existing housing and reduce green areas. But this is generally not true, according to Liang.
“There is an irrational fear of densification. Current research shows that new construction in Sweden rarely takes place at the expense of valuable green spaces and makes most neighbouring areas more rather than less attractive.”
He also emphasises that the current plan for Uppsala does not involve densifying the existing city centre, it means building so as to link districts such as Gottsunda and Bergsbrunna with the city.
Housing can solve segregation problems
It is not only where but how we build that matters. Liang takes Gottsunda as an example. Constructing slightly more exclusive housing makes it possible to attract a mixed population to the district, thereby reducing segregation.
“Whatever strategy we choose, we need to build to avoid segregation, by which I mean a concentration of residents with similar incomes and backgrounds in the same neighbourhood. Where new construction is concerned, this means avoiding areas that only offer exclusive new housing for high-income earners, while using new housing to lift areas that are in decline.”
Do we have to build at all?
“Yes. If we don’t build to keep up with population growth and population pressure – many people want to move here – my current research shows that this leads to overcrowding for low-income families and segregated neighbourhoods where low-income earners are concentrated.”
Sandra Gunnarsson
Facts:
In connection with the EU election on 9 June, a referendum is being held on development in Uppsala Municipality.
The question that is being asked in the referendum is:
Should Uppsala Municipality, in the comprehensive plan, decrease development in Uppsala city by planning for more housing in the urban areas along the Ostkustbanan (Storvreta, Vattholma and Skyttorp) and Dalabanan (Vänge and Järlåsa) railway lines?
Under the present comprehensive plan, at least 80 per cent of future housing in Uppsala Municipality will be built in Uppsala city, primarily
- within four kilometres of Uppsala Central Station
- in connection with the urban nodes of Gränby, Börjetull, Gottsunda/Ultuna and Bergsbrunna
- in southern Uppsala in connection with the tramway and a new railway station.
Under the present comprehensive plan, other future housing will be built in prioritised urban areas and rural areas.
The referendum is advisory in preparation for the adoption of a new comprehensive plan in 2028. The final decision will be taken by the politicians.
Source: Uppsala Municipality