Rents
Rent is commonly defined as the payment or income received for leasing or letting a piece of land. However, beyond being a mere transaction, rent is better understood as the outcome of a complex social relationship. Specifically, rent represents the economic manifestation of landed property relations. Private property rights grant landlords absolute monopoly power to control people’s access to their lands, thereby enabling them to extract rent. Those without property (tenants) are compelled to enter into rent relationships to access residential land, i.e., housing. These property relations are not isolated occurrences. They are social constructs organised by institutional-legal frameworks which govern, enforce, and morally justify these relations. Furthermore, rent is increasingly becoming the primary mechanism through which capital is valorized, meaning that capital is reproduced and accumulated through rent relationships, effectively leveraging monopoly power to increase the value of land-backed assets. This phenomenon, often referred to as rentier capitalism (or residential capitalism in the context of housing), exacerbates social divisions along the lines of property relations: escalating rent pressures and burdens exploit the capacity of property-less individuals to sustain themselves while bolstering the economic power of property owners.
Even in a city like San Francisco, California, known for its extensive tenant protections, the unequal power dynamic between landlords and tenants allows landlords to abruptly and unpredictably increase rents, leading to stress and displacement. Even tenants living under rent control (which imposes limits on annual increases) may face additional charges added to their monthly rent. While such tenants may benefit from additional eviction protections at the municipal level (such as “just cause” regulations), landlords often exploit exceptions to these protections (e.g., family move-ins), state legislation (e.g., the Ellis Act), or rental contract violations to displace long-term tenants and accommodate new tenants willing to pay significantly higher rents.
In the Netherlands, a country similarly renowned for its protective tenant laws and high-quality (social) rental dwellings, the social and economic divide between tenants and property owners is widening. While socially regulated rental housing was historically accessible to lower and middle socio-economic classes, the system is increasingly eroding and only accessible to lower-income groups. Meanwhile, homeownership rates, particularly buy-to-let properties, are rising, driving up rental prices. Despite strong regulations, such as the country’s point-based system, and restrictions on temporary contracts intended to prevent accumulation and unreasonable rent extraction, tenants are often pushed into semi-legality or subjected to “exceptional” rental contracts that offer only temporary housing, with each turnover used as an opportunity to raise prices. Especially young adults increasingly rely on precarious and costly rental housing.
The role of the private rental market has also grown in Spain. Since 2008, the country has been transitioning towards a post-homeownership society, marked by a growing socio-economic divide between property owners with multiple assets and property-less individuals, including landlords and tenants. Reforms implemented in the wake of the global financial crisis have weakened Spain’s already limited tenant protections, with the goal of promoting private rental as an increasingly profitable investment sector. Rising rent burdens and insecurity have led to the formation of Tenant Unions in Madrid and Barcelona, which advocate for enhanced tenants’ rights and rental protections through mobilisation and civil disobedience strategies.
In Greece, where tenant protections have historically been absent, low-cost access to homeownership was once the prevailing solution to housing issues. However, following the property price crash resulting from the 2010 debt crisis, successive governments prioritised reinflating the real estate sector through foreign investment. This policy has left the local population unable to access homeownership due to the collapse of mortgage lending and intergenerational transfers of residential assets, leading to a precarious and unregulated rental market. Rent hikes have been substantial, disproportionately affecting tenant households, many of whom spend over 40% of their income on housing costs. These increases also impact students and public servants in tourist areas, exacerbating housing affordability issues and disrupting social and professional stability.
REFERENCES
Christophers, B. (2020). Rentier Capitalism. Verso.
Haila, A. (2016). Economic Arguments. Rent Theory and Property Rights Theory. In Urban Land Rent. Singapore as a Property State (Wiley Blackwell).
Harvey, D. (1982). Chapter 11: Rent. In The Limits to Capital. Verso.
Howard, A., Hochstenbach, C., & Ronald, R. (2023). Rental sector liberalization and the housing outcomes for young urban adults. Urban Geography, 1-22.
Ryan-Collins, J., Lloyd, T., & Macfarlane, L. (2017). Rethinking the Economics of Land and Housing. Zed Books.
Soederberg, S. (2018). The rental housing question: Exploitation, eviction and erasures. Geoforum, 89, 114–123.
Wigger, A. (2021). Housing as a site of accumulation in Amsterdam and the creation of surplus populations. Geoforum, 126, 451–460.
