Climate‐just housing: A Socio‐spatial Perspective on Climate Policy and Housing

Weißermel, Sören; Wehrhahn, Rainer Article — Published Version Climate‐just housing: A Socio‐spatial Perspective on Climate Policy and Housing International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Provided in Cooperation with: John Wiley & Sons Suggested Citation: Weißermel, Sören; Wehrhahn, Rainer (2024) : Climate‐just housing: A Sociospatial Perspective on Climate Policy and Housing, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, ISSN 1468-2427, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK, Vol. 48, Iss. 4, pp. 628-649, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.13243 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/306216 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF URBAN AND REGIONAL RESEARCH DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.13243 628 — CLIMATEJUST HOUSING: A Sociospatial Perspective on Climate Policy and Housing SörenWeißermel and rainerWehrhahn Abstract Focusing on the nexus of climate and housing policy, this article analyzes the sociospatial consequences of urban climate mitigation policies and the resultant need to broaden the concept of climate justice. By using the example of energy retrofitting in a lowincome district in Kiel, Germany, the article examines cities’ dependence on real estate companies to reach lowcarbon goals in a privatized housing market and the (potential) need to provide incentives for investment. As the case study shows, this can lead to a highly sensitive confluence of climate policy, private real estate investment and neighborhood development policy, which leads to a higher financial burden as well as the potential displacement and further political marginalization of current tenants. In light of these results, the article argues for the application of a climate justice frame in analyses of urban climate policies that integrates housing justice with spatial justice. Specifically, it calls for the right to climatejust housing; that is, for the right to affordable housing to be connected with the right to energyefficient housing in one’s own neighborhood. This implies the right to information and to urban space as political space, which in turn means the politicization of the targets, strategies and, not least, spaces of urban climate policy. Introduction In the context of the intensifying climate crisis and multilateral targets to reduce emissions, and influenced by growing civil society pressure, more and more cities have begun to adopt ambitious climate protection policies. In various cities this has culminated in declarations of a ‘climate emergency’, acknowledging the need for more drastic measures (see Haarstad et al.,2023). Although highly justified from an ecological point of view, this ethos bears the risk of implementing policies that lose sight of sociospatial concerns. In the academic literature, increased attention is being paid to the potential social impacts of intensified urban climate policies within a neoliberal urban development context, illustrated by concepts such as climate change experiments (Bulkeley et al.,2015), lowcarbon gentrification (Bouzarovski et al.,2018), the climatejust city framework of Steele et al.(2012; 2018) and the growing conceptual field of climate urbanism (Broto et al.,2020). As the housing sector accounts for a large share of cities’ total emissions, many climate programs focus on retrofitting the housing stock. In line with Rice et al.’s claim that ‘there is no climate justice without a clear and central focus on housing justice’(2020: 160), further work still needs to be done to analyze the materialization of climate policy in the context of housing and to consider how it affects and interacts with existing geographies of inequality and injustice. We argue that such analyses need to focus on the political and legal frame of spatial configurations, which include property relations as well as housing and neighborhood development policy. The scholarship on spatial justice offers multiple starting points for such a perspective (see e.g. Dikeç,2001; Marcuse,2009; Soja,2010). © 2024 The auThorS. InternatIonal Journal of urban and regIonal research publiShed by John Wiley & SonS lTd on behalf of urban reSearch publicaTionS limiTed. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. We would like to thank the editor and three anonymous referees for their critical and constructive comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. 629CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING This article is developed around the empirical example of climate policy in Kiel, Germany and, more specifically, the energyrelated redevelopment of the lowincome district Kiel- Gaarden. This neighborhood redevelopment is part of Kiel’s ‘Master Plan 100% Climate Protection’ (LH Kiel,2017) to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, which gained momentum through the city’s proclamation of a climate emergency in 2019. However, Kiel’s municipality lacks access to the housing stock, which was completely privatized in 1999. Any progress in lowering household emissions therefore depends on real estate companies’ willingness to invest in energy retrofits. The city’s neighborhood development policy thus relies on incentives and influence. This is illustrated by the case of Kiel- Gaarden, where neighborhood development measures in combination with a tightening housing market create a more investmentfriendly context. The decision of a major real estate company to retrofit a significant part of its housing stock in the neighborhood marks a major step in Kiel’s lowcarbon policy — but also signifies possible shortages of affordable housing for lowincome tenants in Kiel- Gaarden. This article argues for an understanding of climate justice that integrates housing justice with spatial justice from both an academic and a political perspective. We analyze the sociospatial effects of privateled retrofits through the interplay with structural conditions, housing policy and neighborhood development policy. From such a sociospatially sensitive perspective, we discuss the concept of climatejust housing, understood as connecting the right to affordable housing with the right to energyefficient and climateresilient housing in one’s own neighborhood. This latter point is crucial, because only by ensuring spatial justice can the displacement of less powerful population groups from citycenter areas be prevented. There is a connection here to recent debates about the ‘renovation wave’ of the European Union’s Green Deal and the concern of scholars and activists that this endeavor may become a ‘renoviction wave’ (this will be elaborated further in the next section). The article’s scope primarily engages with climate mitigation measures; hence, it does not embrace the discussion around climate adaptation policies. This is an analytical split. The two fields are of course strongly intertwined, as in the example of energy retrofitting, which both reduces carbon emissions as a result of less heating and protects tenants from high outside temperatures. However, apart from some indication of the implications of retrofitting for climate resilience, the article’s scope does not allow consideration of the complex debate about adaptation justice (see Shi et al.,2016; Chu and Cannon,2021). The conclusion offers some indications about how engagement with adaptation justice can be an important element of further research. In the next section we connect the theoretical lines of climate justice, housing justice and spatial justice and preformulate our idea of the concept of climatejust housing. Following this, we provide an overview of tenancy law in Germany, before moving on to the substantive part of the article where we contextualize our case study and analyze the process of neighborhood redevelopment and the effects of rent increases within the field of neighborhood policy. Finally, we discuss our empirical findings and further elaborate the concept of climatejust housing. The sociospatial implications of urban climate policy In the face of growing climate activism and the transfer of responsibility for meeting national emission reduction targets to the municipal level, many city governments have assigned increased importance to lowcarbon policies. These policies have strong implications for urban inequalities and injustices. Connected to the uneven sociospatial impact of climate change within cities (Anguelovski and Roberts,2011; Miller Hesed and Ostergren,2017), there is increasing scholarship about the justice implications of urban climate mitigation policies (Long and Rice,2019; Broto et al.,2020; see also Robin and Broto,2021 on climate urbanism). Critical scholars draw attention to the experimental character of lowcarbon policies (Bulkeley et al.,2015) WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 630 and to actor configurations and power constellations in urban governance regimes (Broto,2017). Within the debate on marketdriven green transitions and green gentrification (Stevis and Felli,2016; Anguelovski et al.,2019), the accelerated energy retrofitting of residential buildings is assuming increased significance. This has been analyzed in terms of energy justice (Bouzarovski and Simcock,2017; Gillard et al.,2017; Grossmann,2019), possible displacement dynamics because of rising rents (von Platten et al.,2022; see also Bouzarovski et al.,2018 on ‘lowcarbon gentrification’), and the need to integrate social policy with climate policy (Seebauer et al.,2019). In the European political debate, this issue has gained greater relevance since the announcement of a ‘renovation wave’ as part of the European Union’s Green Deal in 2020 (European Commission,2020). Warning of a ‘renoviction wave’, FEANTSA(2022) analyzes the potential positive and negative social impacts of an aggressive housing renovation program in the various legal and political circumstances of EU member states. This ongoing debate involves consideration of issues around housing and spatial justice, but it has not yet conceptually integrated these two dimensions. Recognizing the strong overlap between climate justice and housing justice and the spatiality of this nexus, we argue for a conceptual framework that integrates an explicit spatialized and localized perspective on housing justice into the climate justice debate. Following Steele et al.(2012; 2018), climate justice in cities needs to connect social, environmental and ecological justice with the specific local context; that is, the stories and practices of citizens, activists and policymakers. According to the environmental justice debate (Walker,2012), we need to look at the distribution of both the benefits (e.g. new bike lanes) and the burdens (e.g. the cost distribution of energy retrofitting) of climate policy (i.e. distributive justice); who is involved in the planning and execution of lowcarbon policies (i.e. procedural justice); and whose needs are being considered (i.e. justice of recognition). Transferring the climate justice idea to a local urban context therefore encompasses consideration of both marginalized communities that are more vulnerable to the impacts of a changing climate (such as heat waves, for instance), and the impacts of actually exercised climate mitigation and adaptation policies (such as rising rents and a changing neighborhood). This means we need to consider the potential outcomes when city governments that lack access to the housing stock attempt to create a more investmentfriendly environment by giving incentives for private companies to invest in the energy efficiency of residential buildings. As energy retrofitting gains momentum through cities’ efforts towards climate neutrality, further work is needed to analyze the sociospatial implications of this policy. Housing justice is so far mostly negotiated in the context of activist groups and protests (Listerborn et al.,2020; Lima,2021). It refers to housing as a fundamental need that every human being must be able to access. Unlike most commodities, housing is not a purely economic good that is freely available through the system of economic exploitation. A home is not readily interchangeable because of the diverse sociocultural and socioeconomic relationships that exist in the activity field of the home and the living environment more broadly. It is also not portable when people move because of its ‘immobility’. This psychological, social and cultural meaning of housing is central to the concept of housing justice and the demand for all population groups to have equal access to all urban spaces, not only to those that appear least attractive in the capitalist logic of use. This makes the right to housing a complex right in political practice (Wehrhahn,2019). Overall, it is the fundamental spatial dimension of housing that calls for an analytical linkage with the concept of spatial justice. The scholarship on spatial justice offers multiple connecting points to analyze the materialization of climate policy in the context of housing and how it affects and interacts with existing geographies of inequality (Bouzarovski and Simcock,2017). By looking at the structural, historically embedded causes of spatial inequalities and the ‘dialectical relationship between (in)justice and spatiality’ (Dikeç,2001: 1785), the concept 631CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING of spatial justice takes into account the constructivist nature of space. This refers to the complex set of political and economic relations, practices and dynamics that (re)produce spatial constellations of power, stigmatization and inequality (Harvey,1996; Soja,2010). Following Dikeç(2001), regarding spatiality as a process and spatialization as a way to reproduce domination involves considering both ‘injustice in space’ and the (re)production of ‘injustice through space’ (ibid.: 1793–4; emphases in original). Injustice in space acknowledges that injustice materializes through specific distributional arrangements in space. Injustice through space relates to the structural dynamics that constantly (re) produce injustice. These include, for instance, property relations such as the privatized housing market, legislative rental regulations that come into effect in space, municipal power relations and the consequent policy priorities, and entrepreneurial activities. Accordingly, such a spatial justice perspective looks at the reciprocal influence of spatial and social justice and offers a tool for identifying and analyzing the contents and foci of local policy measures and their implications for inequalities and (in)justice (see Marcuse,2009). It highlights the political and legal frame of spatial configurations and helps us analyze how property constellations, housing policy and housing law interact with geographies of inequality and how this determines the sociospatial outcome of climate policy. Furthermore, we need to consider Lefebvre’s(1986) call for the right to the city as also including a right to information in order to enable political contestation. This sheds light on the need to politicize lowcarbon policies and the urban spaces that they target. According to agonistic theory, such politicization enables negotiations about the rules of recognition that determine the distribution of social, economic and political capital and power — in other words, ‘recognition capital’ (Tully,2000: 470). This underlines the work done by social conflicts in unmasking inequalities and injustices and disclosing different and diverging narratives and needs (see Mouffe,2000; Weißermel,2021). Having discussed the interconnectedness of climate justice and housing on a local urban scale, as well as its spatiality, we now seek to preconceptualize the notion of climatejust housing to capture the manifold aspects and dimensions that come into play. First of all, we acknowledge the general right to dignified housing, as demanded by the housing justice movement. Housing needs to become both climatefriendly and climateresilient in terms of lowering household emissions and protecting residents from heat waves through better insulation. This implies the need to prevent the displacement of lowincome tenants through higher rents. Therefore, generally speaking, urban climate policy needs to acknowledge its interconnections and coupling effects with other policies, particularly within a neoliberalized housing market. Climatejust housing, then, signifies the right to both affordable and climateresilient housing in one’s own neighborhood. It implies the fair distribution of climate policies, their benefits and costs. It encompasses justice of recognition concerning the particular needs and circumstances of marginalized communities, as well as the manifold effects of climate and neighborhood policy on them, including the potential reinforcement of inequalities in and through space. This requires an inherently spatial perspective on the urban social structures and sociocultural particularities of neighborhoods targeted by lowcarbon policies. In its interconnectedness with procedural justice, this dimension calls for the involvement of the affected residents, not merely through formalized participation measures but by enabling the neighborhood to become a political space of contestation concerning the shape of urban climate policy and its implementation. Lowcarbon redevelopment in Kiel- Gaarden, Germany While the execution and effects of dominant types of retrofitting are highly controversial (Grossmann,2019), it is undisputable that emissions from residential buildings must be reduced. Problems that may result from energy retrofitting have both structural causes (i.e. the legal and economic framework, which is discussed in the WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 632 subsection below on energy policy and tenancy law), and procedural ones (concerning the nature of the refurbishment process, also detailed more fully below), which are strongly interwoven. First of all, though, we provide some information about the methodological approach. — Methodology The case study uses qualitative empirical data collected between 2019 and 2023. In total, 51 interviews1 were conducted with actors from the municipality, the real estate company and civil society as well as tenants affected by the redevelopment project. All interviews were guided and semistructured. The public, economic and civil society actors were contacted in advance and the conversations were recorded and transcribed later on. Seven of these interviews were held with municipal actors from the department of climate policy, the building department and the district management, two with the regional manager of the real estate company, and one with a private district development initiative. In addition, seven interviews were conducted with local social workers and tenant activists.2 These interviews were analyzed with an open and experimental approach that enabled us to capture the local context comprising the socioeconomic and tenant structures, main actors, municipal policies, economic activities and the surrounding discourses. This was accompanied by an analysis of municipal reports and data. The information gathered enabled the formulation of a questionnaire which served as an orientation template for both conducting and then coding and analyzing the tenant interviews. Several visits to the Sandkrug neighborhood enabled 37 conversations with residents. Tenants were spontaneously approached by spending time in public spaces in front of the relevant residential buildings. This was supplemented by three stopovers at a neighborhood center. The neighborhood visits took place at different times in order to contact different socioeconomic groups. The conversations were structured by the questionnaire and mostly conducted as individual interviews. Some interviews were undertaken with two or three tenants, which involved an interesting empirical addition as it stimulated critical exchanges between the interviewees regarding their experiences with the retrofitting process and rent increases. All of the tenant interviews were recorded with fieldnotes and later codified and analyzed on the basis of the questionnaire (see Kuckartz and Rädiker,2022). — Energy policy and tenancy law In European countries where the housing market is dominated by tenancy, such as Switzerland (57.7% tenants in 2018), Germany (53.5%) or Austria (48.6%), people are more vulnerable to rental market dynamics (Eurostat,2023). Given that there is generally a high ownership rate in rural areas, the share of tenants is accordingly higher in urban areas and usually accounts for the majority of the urban population. In Berlin, for instance, the tenant rate in 2018 was 84% and in Hamburg 79.9% (DESTATIS,2024). In Germany, the sale of stateowned housing during the neoliberalization of urban development included a large share of lowrent apartments that were formerly social housing. Through these and subsequent large acquisitions, private real estate companies evolved into listed companies with considerable influence on the private rental housing market, albeit with regional variations. While their share nationwide is only 13% (in contrast to 43% owned by private individuals), in cities like Berlin, Hamburg and Munich as well as in our example of Kiel, private housing companies own around onequarter of the rental housing stock (Savills,2019). And since the 1 The discussion clearly indicates which actors provided which information, as well as the month and year of the interview for chronological classification. The exact date is given where direct quotations are used. 2 Specifically, the tenant advisory service Mieterbündnis Kiel, the social counseling and tenants’ rights initiative Mietwucher Gaarden, and the leader of the tenant resistance group in the Sandkrug neighborhood. 633CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING erstwhile municipal housing stock consists mainly of (formerly) subsidized social housing, this seemingly modest share accounts for a large proportion of the lower rental price segment. This situation is embedded in a general trend towards an increasing market orientation and the financialization of housing (see Aalbers,2016; Sarnow,2019; Wehrhahn,2019). In Germany, as in other countries with largely deregulated housing markets, continuously rising rents and an investment focus on highprice housing is leading to a constant reduction of the low and middle rental price segment. In Kiel, the municipal housing stock consisted of buildings constructed in the 1950s to 1970s, mostly as subsidized housing in lowerincome neighborhoods. Nowadays, these buildings urgently need refurbishment. By 1999, the city had sold its entire housing stock to a private company. After being resold several times, today it almost entirely belongs to Germany’s biggest real estate company, which owns approximately onequarter of the rental housing stock in Kiel (Kaufmann,2013; Savills,2019; Vonovia,n.d.). The city of Kiel has thus entirely lost direct access to and influence over the municipal rental market. While this constellation has the potential to facilitate intensive retrofitting, provided the company is willing to engage in it, from a longterm perspective the costs are borne almost exclusively by the tenants. German tenancy law — more specifically, the modernization levy; see § 559 of the German Civil Code — allows for 8% of modernization3 costs to be added to the ‘cold rent’ (i.e. rent excluding heating costs; BMV,2020). This includes energyirrelevant measures such as the installation of balconies and elevators. Generally, tenants have no say and must accept these measures. Even after amortization — which takes 12 to 13 years if the modernization levy is applied in full — the rent is allowed to remain at the higher level, which makes modernization lucrative in the long run even without a change of tenant (and new lettings, of course, offer even greater opportunities to make a profit). However, this rent increase is not linked to actual energy savings after refurbishment, which is why ‘warm rent neutrality’ (i.e. where energy savings offset the increase in ‘cold rent’) is usually not achieved (BMV,2017; Grossmann,2019). Tenant protection in Germany is thus counteracted by the modernization levy and the exclusion of such rent increases from rent control laws. Furthermore, retrofitting is not regarded as a valid reason for interim rent reductions. This situation must be seen in the context of a tight housing market, increasing rents in most German cities, and a decreasing share of social housing — which now represents only 4% of the entire residential stock (BBSR,2016; die Unterzeichnenden,2018). When those who receive transfer payments from the state (due to their low income) are affected by rent increases, there is a risk that the responsible authority will no longer cover the rent if a particular cost limit is exceeded. — Lowcarbon redevelopment in Kiel- Gaarden Kiel- Gaarden is one of seven socalled ‘Energy Districts’ in Kiel. With its policy program ‘Klimagaarden’ (from 2014) that aims to reduce household emissions, the area is a target for the municipal lowcarbon policy. Recently, building refurbishment has achieved new momentum, as a major real estate company has decided to undertake energyrelated redevelopment of the Sandkrug neighborhood within Gaarden (Figure2). An analysis of the sociospatial impacts of the neighborhood redevelopment must go beyond a simple focus on rent increases, which have not yet come fully into effect. Rather, we need to take a holistic view of the project’s integration into the municipal climate and housing policy, neighborhood development policy and housing market 3 Energy retrofitting is legally interpreted as improving the rental object and thus counts as a modernization measure. According to a study by the Berlin tenants’ association Berliner Mieterverein, in nearly all of the cases of modernization it reviewed, it was the energy measures undertaken that contributed most to rent increases (BMV, 2017). WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 634 dynamics. Therefore, we shall now provide a brief historical contextualization of the Gaarden district and Sandkrug neighborhood within Kiel before outlining the lowcarbon redevelopment project, its integration into the current political and economic dynamics and implementation of the retrofit works to date. Finally, we will take a look at the already noticeable effects of the first rent increase. — conTexTualizing reTrofiTTing in kielgaarden Kiel- Gaarden represents an interesting example because, on the one hand, it is favorably located close to the city center, Kiel fjord and the university facilities (Figure1), while on the other hand, it has historically been decoupled from the city center with a spatial concentration of underprivileged social groups. Gaarden is an old workingclass neighborhood. Located directly next to Germany’s biggest shipyards (Figure2), it was shaped first by the growth of the shipyard industry and recruitment of foreign workers in the 1950s and then by the shipyard crisis, deindustrialization and massive job cuts from the 1980s onward. Consequently, the process of sociospatial marginalization and concomitant growing stigmatization of the district (LH Kiel,2014; 2020), which began in the 1980s, is rooted in the structural conditions of capitalism; namely, the dynamics of capital accumulation with its cycles of investment and disinvestment. Furthermore, the deregulated and restricted housing market in Kiel has led to a concentration of marginalized groups (e.g. those on low incomes, recipients of transfer payments and people with a migration background) in Gaarden because of lower rents, willing landlords and the inability of such groups to access the housing market in other neighborhoods. However, because of its location, the still relatively low rents, its multicultural character and the historical building substance at its center, Gaarden offers a potentially favorable frame for neighborhood upgrading. Neighborhood policies targeting this sociospatial marginalization have failed to deal with its structural roots. In 2000, Gaarden became part of the federal ‘social city’ program for socalled disadvantaged neighborhoods. In light of an active civil society in Gaarden, which includes nonprofit associations, migrants’ associations, sports clubs and political initiatives, the program tried to ensure construction measures were introduced with the involvement of the local population and it established a local office for neighborhood management and mediation with the city government. However, the budget for this was relatively small, successes remained sporadic, and both the inequalities and the negative image persisted. In 2018, the municipality started a neighborhood development program called ‘Gaarden10’ (read: ‘Gaarden to the power of 10’; LH Kiel,2018), which draws together existing programs and initiatives. This new program openly aims to promote social mixing and upgrading by bundling public and private capital for urban development projects, including promotion of the creative economy and public order. The program expects higherincome tenants to move into the district, but also students, particularly as it includes an extension of the university’s faculty of engineering (Figure2). Given that the Gaarden district is expected to become more attractive and the housing market is currently experiencing the highest percentage increase of its rental prices citywide (IB.SH,2020), the context is more investorfriendly than in the past. This is in line with the continuously increasing land values in Gaarden, with the Sandkrug neighborhood doubling its land value over the last eight years (GDISH,2023). One integral part of the district development policy is neighborhood redevelopment, with a focus on energy retrofitting. However, the municipality has no access to the existing housing stock and is dependent on the investment patterns of private owners. After years without significant progress for ‘Klimagaarden’, in 2018 the biggest German real estate company, a listed enterprise, decided to retrofit its (formerly municipal) housing stock in the Sandkrug neighborhood (Figure2). After additional property 635CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING purchases, the company now owns almost the entire residential area, which allows holistic redevelopment. The Sandkrug neighborhood has a relatively favorable location within Gaarden and the city of Kiel. It enjoys fairly quiet, somewhat elevated surroundings with a view of Kiel fjord and the shipyards. In the immediate vicinity is the university’s faculty of engineering and the center of Gaarden with retail, gastronomy and multicultural appeal. Despite its central functions, Gaarden’s connection to the western central city with the principal commercial center and the main university campus is blocked by the shipyards, major roads and parking lots. However, this will change significantly when FIGURE 1 The city of Kiel and location of the Gaarden district (map produced by the authors using OpenStreetMap) ThyssenKrupp Marine ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems GmbH Systems GmbH Gaarden Gaarden K K I I E E L L F F J J O O R R D D Düsternbrook Düsternbrook Ravensberg Ravensberg Wik Wik Wellingdorf Wellingdorf Neumühlen- Neumühlen- Dietrichsdorf Dietrichsdorf Brunswik Brunswik Schreventeich Schreventeich Vorstadt Vorstadt Südfriedhof Südfriedhof Mönkeberg Mönkeberg C C entral Station entral Station Limit of Gaarden District Sandkrug Neighborhood City Limit Gaarden K I E L F J O R D PORT OF KIEL Düsternbrook Ravensberg Wik Wellingdorf Neumühlen- Dietrichsdorf Mönkeberg Brunswik Schreventeich Vorstadt Südfriedhof 01km ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems GmbH Central Station WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 642 for instance through the frame of an upgrading policy. This constellation is highly sensitive as it involves urgent climate change mitigation and adaptation measures as well as the housing question. In Germany, both these fields have recently attracted enormous public attention because of the accelerating climate crisis and an increasingly exclusive housing market. Climate activism and tenant activism have thus emerged as the two biggest fields of social mobilization. As we have seen, the ecological and social problems these activists call attention to are profoundly interconnected and share similar structural roots. However, despite the political potential that activist cooperation would have, climate and tenant activist groups largely act independently of each other. The structural conditions of the market logic and legislation under which the housing sector has been operating since it was deregulated in the 1990s and 2000s are important here (see the earlier discussion on energy policy and tenancy law) as they play social and environmental demands off against each other. The assertion of an ‘ecosocial paradox’ (Holm,2011) or a ‘new socioecological contradiction’ (Rice et al.,2020: 145) suggests that ecological and social goals are mutually incompatible. This results in a situation where climate activist groups in Kiel like Fridays for Future or the citizen initiative Klimanotstand (Climate Emergency) call for immediate and accelerated energy retrofitting of the entire housing stock without taking account of tenant concerns (citizen initiative activist April 2021; Fridays for Future Kiel,2023), while tenant activists in Gaarden strongly oppose energybased retrofits and do not engage with attempts to reconcile tenant protection and climate mitigation measures, as highlighted by an activist from the tenants’ rights initiative (December 2019). Similarly, projects for the ecological transformation of transport, which is a core aspect of climate activism, are planned on the edge of Gaarden (e.g. bike lanes and restricting roads for automobiles), but are interpreted by tenant activists as forerunners of gentrification (Mieterbündnis Kiel, December 2019; Mietwucher Gaarden, December 2019; leader of the Sandkrug tenant resistance group, September 2020). Associated with this, an employee of the climate protection department (November 2019) raised the problem of climate policy in Kiel being predominantly negotiated between municipal and private stakeholders and the educated middle class. Yet in Gaarden, ‘climate protection is not a topic at all, for social reasons, many have those everyday problems’, as the district manager underlines (10 May 2021). This lack of integration is also reflected in the Sandkrug neighborhood, where the lack of information and depoliticized character of the redevelopment project make it difficult for tenants to politically organize and connect to local tenant activism in Gaarden, let alone to climate justice issues. This is problematic with regards both to the cohesion of an already highly unequal society and to generating social support for climate policy. When a lowcarbon policy materializes through investment and use of the modernization levy in lowincome neighborhoods, the resultant increases in rents may either lead to (increased) financial precarity or the displacement of tenants to spatially more marginal residential areas and buildings which are probably badly insulated. Either way, the existing conflict around distribution is intensified and society becomes even more materially and discursively divided. — The spatial injustices of lowcarbon neighborhood redevelopment The example of Kiel- Gaarden shows that spatialized neighborhood development policies may reduce the spatial marginalization of a neighborhood, in that it becomes better integrated into capital investment cycles and where an influx of students and higherincome groups leads to more interaction between the neighborhood and the wider city. However, as Marcuse(2009: 5) argues, ‘putting resources into the unjust space’ without ‘dealing with the relationships that have caused the injustice’ does not reduce the social marginalization of underprivileged inhabitants, because the marginalization is structurally rooted. Returning to Dikeç(2001), this rather static 643CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING perspective on injustice in space fails to consider the structural and power dynamics that constantly reproduce injustice through space. These dynamics include housing market arrangements and dialogues with housing policy and tenancy law, the power structures and dynamics of the labor market, municipal dependence on private investment, and unequal access to education or urban participation schemes. The spatiality of injustice (injustice in space) is thus fundamentally interwoven with and conditioned by the injustice of spatiality (injustice through space). Therefore, compensating for spatial injustices with infrastructural improvements can lead to increased social injustice. The requirements of housingrelated, commercially implemented urban climate policy and the modernization levy both fuel the already rising rents. While the business policy of staggered rent increases may allow some tenants to remain in their apartments and benefit from wellinsulated housing (at least in the short term), this does not correspond to lowincome people moving into the neighborhood, since they are unable to afford the prices of new lettings. We can therefore assume that in the given structural context, lowincome tenants are only able to afford energyefficient and climateresilient housing temporarily, if at all, until the final round of rent increases or the termination of a rental contract forces them to move. To return to Marcuse(2009), spatial remedies without a focus on social inequalities potentially lead to displacement as a consequence. In the case of Kiel- Gaarden, the neighborhood’s spatial integration may be realized through the spatial displacement of marginality, as the advancing neighborhood redevelopment provokes a successive exchange of tenants. This only relocates spatial injustices, however; it does not alleviate but rather intensifies social injustices in a different place with poorer connectivity and fewer infrastructural facilities or insulated apartments, thus actually intensifying the spatial marginalization of those affected. Climate policy and its confluence with neighborhood development policy therefore offers a frame for reproducing the existing mode of production, as the municipality’s cooperation with the real estate company in the form of encouraging investments enables capital accumulation in the neighborhood, thus reinforcing exclusionary modes of domination through the capitalist housing market. Apart from the further marginalization and displacement of current tenants, we also need to consider procedural and recognitionbased injustices in the planning and implementation of lowcarbon neighborhood redevelopment projects (Weißermel,2023). In our case study, the project was planned by the company in line with economic expectations and aimed at a future clientele, without the current tenants being given prior information, let alone a chance to participate. Tenants faced significant barriers to information, as local communication channels with the company were largely blocked and the municipality did not appear in the project. Residents had no information about the refurbishment process or the reasons behind delays, and there was a complete lack of communication about the important role played by the project in Kiel’s overall climate policy. As Lefebvre(1986) noted, spatial justice — in its conception of the right to the city — also means the right ‘to a political space’. This means an ‘enabling right’ (Dikeç,2001: 1790) to enter political struggle and through this struggle to take part in the negotiation of urban life and the contestation of urban development. This right requires full information and open communication channels. Climate justice thus needs to include spatial justice within its frame, in the sense of urban space as political space that enables agonistic encounters (Mouffe,2000). It means contentious negotiations about the city’s path to climate neutrality and the sectors, people, techniques and procedures involved. Climatepolicy- related neighborhood redevelopment is based on technical measures and is thus often presented as a neutral and efficient lowcarbon policy. However, similar to the enormous recent politicization of general questions of socioecological transformation, particularly regarding issues of mobility and WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 644 energy generation (Sander and Weißermel, 2023), such redevelopment must also be repoliticized and connected to current socioecological conflicts and struggles. This includes the politicization of the neighborhood itself as a place of political contestation. It also means enabling the political struggle of the affected residents by uncovering sociospatial inequalities and injustices as well as the residents’ perspectives, narratives and needs (see Steele et al.,2012; 2018). — Climatejust housing The question of how we want to live in a changed climate and how we decarbonize our housing is a highly relevant social and existential issue, closely connected to the housing question and the character of climate policy in general. It is a thoroughly spatial issue that intersects with structures of injustice in and through space within a highly uneven capitalist housing market, with very specific spatial peculiarities and manifestations. Contesting the ecosocial paradox, the need for lowemission housing with regards to energy efficiency, climateresponsive architecture and lowemission construction material is strongly interwoven with the concept of climatejust housing. Climatejust housing includes (1) the right to energyefficient housing, which is increasingly important in light of rising energy prices. This is interwoven with (2) the right to climateadapted housing in order to make housing resilient to climate change, e.g. the increasing heat exposure in cities. Finally, it signifies (3) the right to stay in one’s neighborhood, which meets the demand of housing justice for housing access to all urban areas for all urban citizens in order to avoid spatial exclusion. Given that energy generation is closely connected to questions of residential energy consumption and costs, this concept can be usefully linked to debates around the decentralization and democratization of energy production (e.g. tenant electricity and energy cooperatives; see Becker and Naumann2017). We thus take up Soja’s(2009: 352) call to apply spatially conscious practices and politics to the context of climate policy and underline the need to consider structural conditions when addressing present and future social inequalities and injustices in space. The importance and interconnectedness of the decarbonization of housing requires its politicization. We must enable political negotiations and agonistic encounters around this question that embrace all affected groups of (urban) society, political decisionmakers and relevant economic actors such as real estate companies. Such politicization concerns, first, the actual housingrelated lowcarbon policy and the specific places of energyrelated retrofitting as well as the design and implementation of such projects. Second, it concerns more structural questions of legal regulation, cost distribution and configurations of ownership. This includes problematizing the modernization levy, demanding its abolition or substantial reduction, and ensuring it is linked to actual energy savings in order to secure the proportionality and efficiency of investments and exclude energyirrelevant modernization measures such as the mounting of balconies. Arguments around financial feasibility must be countered by serious discussions about cost distribution and the (re)distribution of state resources for financing climate policy measures, since the current approach in Germany favors companies and middle- to highincome groups (see Löschel et al.,2021). One proposal that was introduced by environmental and tenant organizations and is currently under discussion is the onethird model, in which the state, landlords and tenants share the refurbishment costs. This includes a reduction of the modernization levy to 1.5% but allows landlords to accept state subsidies without having to deduct them from the costs they can claim (which effectively leads to an allocation of 3%; Mellwig and Pehnt,2019). At the municipal level, the key to greater access to relevant infrastructure and, consequently, increased municipal agency lies in the ownership of urban land (Wehrhahn,2019). In order to allow climatejust housing, climate policy and housing 645CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING must be disconnected from the market logic and democratized. In contrast to past neoliberal policies, cities need to create or enlarge their communal housing stock through new construction and the remunicipalization of private housing so as to create a marketrelevant counterweight to private players and, in turn, influence average rents. Central to this is a legal right of first refusal, which enables municipalities to enter into a valid purchase contract for a residential building in place of the commercial buyer. Because of a controversial federal court decision, this right is currently suspended in Germany, but it is strongly supported by political factions of the left and center as well as tenant advocates. In this respect, a high degree of politicization of the housing issue can be seen in the Berlin civil society initiative ‘Expropriating Deutsche Wohnen and Co.’ (‘Deutsche Wohnen und Co. enteignen’; see Vollmer and Gutiérrez,2022). In 2021, there was a successful referendum demanding the remunicipalization of all the housing stock of real estate companies that own more than 3,000 apartments in Berlin; the municipal government now has to work out a constitutional legislative proposal to implement this referendum decision. Integrating the climate issue into the politicized housing debate would allow engagement with the alleged ecosocial paradox and demonstrate the interconnectedness of climate and housing justice issues and their common structural roots of injustice. We argue that the concept of climatejust housing offers a useful frame for the politicization of the climatehousing nexus. Conclusion Using the example of a lowcarbon neighborhood redevelopment in Kiel- Gaarden, this article addressed the need for increased research on case studies involving lowcarbon investments in lowincome neighborhoods within the privatized rental market (see von Platten et al.,2022 as one of the few studies on this). When investment is largely undertaken by big real estate companies, city governments have to incentivize them to implement refurbishment work in order to meet the lowcarbon targets. As in our case study, this can be achieved through neighborhood upgrading projects that make investments more attractive. Together with the resulting rent increases from privateled retrofitting, this can trigger a twofold displacement pressure. While energy retrofitting is indispensable from an ecological point of view and has the potential to reduce energy costs and make tenants less vulnerable to heat waves, in Germany the current political and legal situation renders energy retrofitting an instrument for increasing rents and enhancing profit. Clearly, if technical lowcarbon measures are implemented without considering sociospatial inequalities, this can aggravate conflicts of distribution and sociospatial inequalities, which, again, has negative consequences for societal cohesion and support for climate policy. Our findings confirm the need for a thoroughly spatial perspective on housing within climate mitigation policies. In light of the present day’s intensified focus on urban climate policy and hence energy retrofitting, we argue that, first, it is imperative to apply a climate justice frame to the analysis of such climate mitigation policies; second, this perspective needs to integrate spatial justice with housing justice. The integration of a spatial justice perspective in our discussion has demonstrated the potential of such an approach for critically examining the possible consequences of urban climate policy. This involves the spatial manifestation of inequality and injustice through the spatial concentration of marginalized groups or processes of spatial displacement. Furthermore, it concerns the structures and dynamics that reproduce inequality and injustice through space. These include, for instance, local housing market arrangements and their reproduction through housing policy and tenancy law, municipalities’ dependence on private investment, as well as unequal access to education, information or urban participation schemes. Consequently, local lowcarbon investments may further exacerbate spatial injustices. WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 646 While the debate about a marketdriven green transition increasingly involves consideration of housing justice and spatial justice issues (Bouzarovski and Simcock,2017; Rice et al.,2020), we identified a consistent failure to conceptually integrate these dimensions. Hence, we developed the concept of climatejust housing as a conceptual proposal and a starting point for integrating housing justice and spatial justice into the urban climate justice debate. This concept is based on the premise that in the current socioecological crisis, neither ecological nor social rights can be compromised. Climatejust housing subsumes the right to energyefficient housing, the right to climateresilient housing and the right to stay in one’s neighborhood. According to Lefebvre’s(1986) right to information and to urban space as political space, this involves the right to enter the political struggle around the identification, elaboration and implementation of lowcarbon measures. It requires the politicization of urban climate policy and its concrete spaces such as refurbished neighborhoods. Those affected must be actively informed, with full transparency and open communication channels for both public and private actors. There are strong structural and politicoeconomic barriers to the realization of these principles and they must be tackled. First, legislative reforms are required, as is a public housing policy that recognizes the public security of urban land as essential to spatial and housing justice in the city. This would represent a fundamental political transformation of the neoliberal and financializationdriven paradigm. Second, the politicization of the climatehousing nexus and the enabling of agonistic encounters around urban climate policy are necessary. A joining of the forces and demands of climate activism and tenant activism would have the political potential to expose the interplay between ecological and social issues, the interconnected inequalities and injustices and their similar structural roots. Given the seriousness of this topic for our future social coexistence and in order to stimulate discussion about viable alternatives, there need to be more studies of cases within similar or different structural and legal contexts. In addition, it would be interesting to explore the extent to which experiences and findings from more radical examples, such as refurbishment programs in tenement syndicates (Hurlin,2018) or socalled ecovillages (Pickerill et al.,2023), could be made fruitful for privatized contexts. While our discussion already highlights some considerable overlap between mitigation measures — such as residential retrofitting in relation to climate adaptation concerns — greater involvement in the discussion on adaptation justice could help to further develop the concept of climatejust housing. Among other factors, this concerns the hotly debated integration of justice into all steps of urban development and planning (Fünfgeld and Schmid,2020; Chu and Cannon,2021). Furthermore, the frequent reference in this discussion to socalled vulnerable and marginalized groups and their involvement in the planning process (Shi et al.,2016) could help to anchor and operationalize a right to good insulation and suggest additional components of climateresilient housing. Finally, given the risk that, in a privatized context, typical adaptation measures such as the greening of residential districts could further fuel rises in rents (Anguelovski et al.,2019), discussions about climatejust housing should integrate both climate mitigation and adaptation policies. Cities need to embrace a spatially sensitive understanding of the climatehousing nexus in order to avoid increasing sociospatial inequalities. Adopting the principles of climatejust housing would be a starting point to turn lowcarbon transformation into a societal project that seizes the opportunity of using its transformative potential to create a less unequal and more democratic society. Sören Weißermel, Department of Geography, Christian- Albrechts- Universität zuKiel/Kiel University, Ludewig- Meyn- Str. 8, 24118 Kiel, Germany, [email protected] 647CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING Rainer Wehrhahn, Department of Geography, Christian- Albrechts- Universität zuKiel, Ludewig- Meyn- Str. 8, 24118 Kiel, Germany, [email protected] References Aalbers, M.B. (2016) The financialization of housing: a political economy approach. Routledge, London and New York, NY. Anguelovski, I. and D. Roberts (2011) Spatial justice and climate change: multiscale impacts and local development in Durban, South Africa. In J. Carmin and J. Agyeman (eds.), Environmental inequalities beyond borders: local perspectives on global injustices, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA and London. Anguelovski, I., J.J. Connolly, M. Garcia- Lamarca, H. Cole and H. Pearsall (2019) New scholarly pathways on green gentrification: what does the urban ‘green turn’ mean and where is it going? Progress in Human Geography 43.6, 1064–86. BBSR (Bundesinstitut für Bau- , Stadt- und Raumforschung) (2016) Mietrecht und energetische Sanierung im europäischen Vergleich [Tenancy law and energyefficient refurbishment in a European comparison] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. bbsr. bund. de/ BBSR/ DE/ veroe ffent lichu ngen/ bbsronline/ 2016/ bbsronlin e- 13- 2016- dl. pdf?__ blob= publi catio nFile & v= 3 (accessed 1 February 2024). Becker, S. and M. Naumann (2017) Energy democracy: mapping the debate on energy alternatives. Geography Compass 11.8, e12321. BMV (Berliner Mieterverein e.V.) (2017) Mieterhöhungen nach Modernisierung und Energieeinsparung: empirische Kurzstudie über 200 Maßnahmen im Berliner Mietwohngebäudebestand [Rent increases after modernization and energy saving: a short empirical study of 200 measures in Berlin’s rental housing stock] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. berli nermiete rvere in. de/ downl oads/ pm- 1725- moder nisie rungbmv- kurzs tudie. pdf (accessed 1 February 2024). BMV (Berliner Mieterverein e.V.) (2020) Info 19: die Mieterhöhungsmöglichkeiten nach §§ 557 bis 561 BGB [Info 19: the possibilities for rent increases according to §§ 557 to 561 of the German Civil Code] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. berli nermiete rvere in. de/ recht/ infob laett er/ info- 19- miete rhoeh ungsm oegli chkei tennach- % C2% A7% C2% A7- 557- bis- 561- bgbgrund miete - moder nisie rungs umlag egesti egene - betri ebsko stenstaff elmie teindex miete. htm (accessed 1 February 2024). Bouzarovski, S. and N. Simcock (2017) Spatializing energy justice. Energy Policy 107, 640–48. Bouzarovski, S., J. Frankowski and S. Tirado Herrero (2018) Lowcarbon gentrification: when climate change encounters residential displacement. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 42.5, 845–63. Broto, V.C. (2017) Urban governance and the politics of climate change. World Development 93, 1–15. Broto, V.C., E. Robin and A. While (2020) Climate urbanism: towards a critical research agenda. Springer Nature, Berlin and Heidelberg. Bulkeley, H.A., V.C. Broto and G.A. Edwards (2015) An urban politics of climate change: experimentation and the governing of sociotechnical transitions. Routledge, London and New York, NY. Chu, E.K. and C.E. Cannon (2021) Equity, inclusion, and justice as criteria for decisionmaking on climate adaptation in cities. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 51, 85–94. DESTATIS (Deutsches Statistisches Bundesamt) (2024) Wohnen: Eigentumsquote [Housing: ownership rate] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. desta tis. de/ DE/ Themen/ Gesel lscha ft- Umwelt/ Wohnen/ Tabel len/ tabel leeigen tumsq uote. html (accessed 3 June 2024). Die Unterzeichnenden (2018) Für eine wirklich soziale Wohnungspolitik: Wissenschaftler_innen fordern Schutz der Bestandsmieten, Gemeinnützigkeit und Demokratisierung [For a truly social housing policy:academics call for the protection of existing rents, nonprofit status and democratization]. Sub\ urban: zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 6.2/3, 205–22. Dikeç, M. (2001) Justice and the spatial imagination. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 33.10, 1785–805. European Commission (2020) A renovation wave for Europe: greening our buildings, creating jobs, improving lives [WWW document]. URL https:// eurlex. europa. eu/ legal - conte nt/ EN/ TXT/ HTML/? uri= CELEX: 52020 DC066 2& from= EN (accessed 16 March 2023). Eurostat (2023) Housing in Europe–2023 edition [WWW document]. URL https:// ec. europa. eu/ euros tat/ web/ inter activ epubli catio ns/ housi ng- 2023# howwe- live (accessed 3 June 2024). FEANTSA (European Federation of National Organizations Working with the Homeless) (2022) How to avoid a renoviction wave: report on the social impacts of the renovation wave [WWW document]. URL https:// www. feant sa. org/ public/ user/ Resou rces/ repor ts/ 2022/1_ How_ to_ avoid_a_ Renov iction_ wave. pdf (accessed 16 March 2023). Fridays for Future Kiel (2023) Kommunalwahl 2023 [Local elections 2023] [WWW document]. URL https:// frida ysfor future. de/ ortsg ruppen/ kiel/ kommu nalwa hl- 2023/ (accessed 4 July 2023). Fünfgeld, H. and B. Schmid (2020) Justice in climate change adaptation planning: conceptual perspectives on emergent praxis. Geographica Helvetica 75.4, 437–49. GDISH (Geodateninfrastruktur Schleswig- Holstein) (2023) Digitaler Atlas Nord: Bodenrichtwerte SH [Digital atlas north: standard land values in Schleswig- Holstein] [WWW document]. URL https:// danord. gdish. de/ viewer/ resou rces/ apps/ VBORIS/ index. html? lang= de#/ (accessed 4 July 2023). Geist, M. (2022) Sandkrug in Kiel- Gaarden: Vonovia hat schon 240 Wohnungen modernisiert [Sandkrug in Kiel- Gaarden: Vonovia has already modernized 240 apartments]. Kieler Nachrichten, 15 December [WWW document]. URL https:// www. knonline. de/ lokal es/ kiel/ amsandk rugin- kielgaard enhat- vonov ia- 240- wohnu ngenmoder nisie rt- 6WO35 GGGNO 2IYWX GGAIH 4MMORQ. html (accessed 1 February 2024). Gillard, R., C. Snell and M. Bevan (2017) Advancing an energy justice perspective of fuel poverty: household vulnerability and domestic retrofit policy in the United Kingdom. Energy Research & Social Science 29, 53–61. Grossmann, K. (2019) Using conflicts to uncover injustices in energy transitions: the case of social impacts of energy efficiency policies in the housing sector in Germany. Global Transitions 1, 148–56. Haarstad, H., J. Grandin, K. Kjærås and E. Johnson (2023) Haste: the slow politics of climate urgency. UCL Press, London. Harvey, D. (1996) Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Blackwell, Oxford. Holm, A. (2011) Ein ökosoziales Paradoxon: Stadtumbau und Gentrifizierung [An ecosocial paradox: urban redevelopment and gentrification]. Politische Ökologie 124, 45–52. Hurlin, L. (2018) Mietshäuser Syndikat: collective ownership, the ‘housing question’ and degrowth. In A. Nelson and F. Schneider (eds.), Housing for degrowth: principles, models, challenges and opportunities, Routledge, London and New York, NY. IB.SH (Investitionsbank Schleswig- Holstein) (2020) Sonderauswertung aus dem IB.SH Mietenmonitoring auf Datengrundlage von Immobilien Scout, empirica systeme, VNW, BFW und Haus & Grund [Special analysis from IB.SH rent monitoring based on data WEIßERMEL AND WEHRHAHN 648 from Immobilien Scout, empirica systeme, VNW, BFW and Haus & Grund]. Unpublished. Kaufmann, K.K. (2013) Kommunikation und Handeln lokaler Akteure des Wohnungsmarktes nach der Komplettveräußerung kommunaler Wohnungsbestände [Communication and action of local actors in the housing market after the complete sale of municipal housing stock]. PhD dissertation, Faculty VI: Planning, Building, Environment, TU Berlin, Berlin. Kuckartz, U. and S. Rädiker (2022) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung [Qualitative content analysis: methods, practice, computer support]. 5th edition, Beltz Juventa, Weinhaim and Basel. Lefebvre H. (1986) Le retour de la dialectique: douze mots clefs pour le monde moderne [The return of dialectics: twelve key words for the modern world]. Messidor, Paris. LH Kiel (Landeshauptstadt Kiel) (2014) Integriertes Entwicklungskonzept Kieler Ostufer 2014–2018 im Rahmen des Städtebauförderungsprogramms ‘soziale Stadt’ [The integrated development concept Kieler Ostufer 2014–2018 as part of the ‘social city’ urban development program] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. kiel. de/ de/ gesun dheit_ sozia les/ sozia lplan ung_ beric hte_ konfe renzen/ sozia le_ stadt/ _ dokum ente_ sozia le_ stadt/ iek_ kieler_ ostuf er_ 2014- 2018. pdf (accessed 7 July 2023). LH Kiel (Landeshauptstadt Kiel) (2017) Masterplan 100% Klimaschutz für die Landeshauptstadt Kiel. Endbericht [Master Plan 100% climate protection for the state capital Kiel. Final report]. [WWW document]. URL https:// www. kiel. de/ de/ umwelt_ verke hr/ klima schut z/_ dokum ente_ maste rplan/ Endbe richt_ Maste rplan_ 100_ Proze nt_ Klima schutz_ Kiel. pdf (accessed 1 February 2024). LH Kiel (Landeshauptstadt Kiel) (2018) Gaarden Hoch 10: Entwicklungsperspektiven für Kiel- Gaarden [Gaarden to the power of 10: development perspectives for Kiel- Gaarden] [WWW document]. URL https:// kiel. de/ de/ kiel_ zukun ft/ stadt teile/ _ dokum ente_ gaard en/ entwi cklun gsstr ategie_ gaard en_ hoch_ 10. pdf (accessed 1February 2024). LH Kiel (Landeshauptstadt Kiel) (2020) Sozialbericht 2020. Daten für Taten: Wohnungslosigkeit in Kiel [Social report 2020. Data for action: homelessness in Kiel] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. kiel. de/ de/ gesun dheit_ sozia les/ sozia lplan ung_ beric hte_ konfe renzen/ sozia lberi cht/_ dokum ente_ sozia lberi cht/ 2020/ files/ assets/ common/ downl oads/ publi cation. pdf? uni= 4d1c9 edfd4 82f81 681dc a1836 5f6814c (accessed 1February 2024). Lima, V. (2021) From housing crisis to housing justice: towards a radical right to a home. Urban Studies 58.16, 3283–98. Listerborn, C., I. Molina and R. Åse (2020) Claiming the right to dignity: new organizations for housing justice in Sweden. Radical Housing Journal 2.1, 119–37. Long, J., and J.L. Rice (2019) From sustainable urbanism to climate urbanism. Urban Studies 56.5, 992–1008. Löschel, A., T. Baldenius, T. Bernstein, M. Kalkuhl, M. von Kleist- Retzow, N. Koch, A. Bekk, A. Held, J. George, D. Radulescu, M. Pahle, S. Sommer, L. Mattauch, D.Setton, O. Renn, H. Kahl, K. Pittel, M. Kalkuhl and D.M. Radulescu (2021) Wie fair ist die Energiewende? Verteilungswirkungen in der deutschen Energie- und Klimapolitik [How fair is the energy transition? Distributional effects in German energy and climate policy]. ifo Schnelldienst 74.6, 3–33. Marcuse, P. (2009) Spatial justice: derivative but causal of social injustice. Spatial Justice 1.4, 1–6. Mellwig, P. and M. Pehnt (2019) Sozialer Klimaschutz in Mietwohnungen: Kurzgutachten zur sozialen und klimagerechten Aufteilung der Kosten bei energetischer Modernisierung im Wohnungsbestand [Social climate protection in rented housing: a short report on the social and climate-friendly distribution of costs for energy modernization in the housing stock]. Institut für Energie- und Umweltforschung (IFEU), Heidelberg. Miller Hesed, C.D. and D.M. Ostergren (2017) Promoting climate justice in highincome countries: lessons from African American communities on the Chesapeake Bay. Climatic Change 143.1, 185–200. Mouffe, C. (2000) The democratic paradox. Verso, London. Pickerill, J., T. Chitewere, N. Cornea, J. Lockyer, R. Macrorie, J.M. Blažek and A. Nelson (2023) Urban ecological futures: five ecocommunity strategies for more sustainable and equitable cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 48.1, 161–76. Rice, J.L., D.A. Cohen, J. Long and J.R. Jurjevich (2020) Contradictions of the climatefriendly city: new perspectives on ecogentrification and housing justice. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 44.1, 145–65. Robin, E. and V.C. Broto (2021) Towards a postcolonial perspective on climate urbanism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 45.5, 869–78. Sander, H. and S. Weißermel (2023) Urban heat transition in Berlin: Corporate strategies, political conflicts, and just solutions. Urban Planning 8, 361–371. Sarnow, M. (2019) ‘Wir kaufen den Kiez zurück’: Milieuschutz und Vorkaufsrecht als Ansätze einer postneoliberalen Wohnraumversorgung in Berlin Friedrichshain- Kreuzberg? [‘We’re buying back the neighborhood’: neighborhood protection and preemption rights as the approach to a postneoliberal housing supply in Berlin Friedrichshain- Kreuzberg?]. sub\urban: zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung 7.1/2, 115–36. Savills (2019) Eigentümerstruktur am Wohnungsmarkt: Wohnungsmarkt Deutschland, März 2019 [Ownership structure in the housing market: housing market Germany, March 2019] [WWW document]. URL https:// pdf. euro. savil ls. co. uk/ germa nyresea rch/ ger- 2019/ spotl ighteigen tumer struk turam- wohnu ngsma rkt. pdf (accessed 1 February 2024). Schipper, S. (2022) Gentrifizierung powered by Vonovia [Gentrification powered by Vonovia]. In J. Glatter and M. Mießner (eds.), Gentrifizierung und Verdrängung [Gentrification and displacement], transcript Verlag, Bielefeld. Schwenke, K. (2019) Mieter aus Kiel verlangt ‘Vonovia soll die Wahrheit sagen’ [Tenant from Kiel demands ‘Vonovia should tell the truth’]. Kieler Nachrichten, 5 April [WWW document]. URL https:// www. knonline. de/ lokal es/ kiel/ vonov iasoll- diewahrh eitsagen - QXHO5 GLFNF 2YHPM NSQCI NKZSBI. html (accessed 4 July 2023). Seebauer, S., M. Friesenecker and K. Eisfeld (2019) Integrating climate and social housing policy to alleviate energy poverty: an analysis of targets and instruments in Austria. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 14.7- 9, 304–26. Shi, L., E. Chu, I. Anguelovski, A. Aylett, J. Debats, K. Goh, T.Schenk, K.C. Seto, D. Dodman, D. Roberts, T. Roberts and S.D. VanDeveer (2016) Roadmap towards justice in urban climate adaptation research. Nature Climate Change 6.2, 131–7. Soja, E. (2009) The city and spatial justice. Justice spatiale/ Spatial Justice 1.1, 1–5. Soja, E.W. (2010) Seeking spatial justice. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN and London. Steele, W., D. MacCallum, J. Byrne and D. Houston (2012) Planning the climatejust city. International Planning Studies 17.1, 67–83. Steele, W., J. Hillier, D. Houston, J. Byrne and D. MacCallum (2018) The climatejust city. In T. Jafry (ed.), Routledge handbook of climate justice, Routledge, London. Stevis, D. and R. Felli (2016) Green transitions, just transitions. Kurswechsel 3, 35–45. Tully, J. (2000). Struggles over recognition and distribution. Constellations, 7.4, 469–82. Unger, K. (2018) Mieterhöhungsmaschinen: zur Finanzialisierung und Industrialisierung der unternehmerischen Wohnungswirtschaft [Rentincreasing machines: on the financialization and industrialization of the corporate housing industry]. PROKLA: Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialwissenschaft 48.191, 205–25. 649CLIMATE- JUST HOUSING Vollmer, L. and D. Gutiérrez (2022) Organizing for expropriation: how a tenants campaign convinced Berliners to vote for expropriating big landlords. Radical Housing Journal 4.2, 47–66. Von Platten, J., M. Mangold, T. Johansson and K. Mjörnell (2022) Energy efficiency at what cost? Unjust burdensharing of rent increases in extensive energy retrofitting projects in Sweden. Energy Research & Social Science 92, 102791. Vonovia (n.d.) Leben am Meer: finden Sie Ihre neue Mietwohnung in Kiel [Living by the sea: find your new rental flat in Kiel] [WWW document]. URL https:// www. vonov ia. de/ dede/ wohnu ngenin- kiel (accessed1February 2024). Walker, G. (2012) Environmental justice: concepts, evidence and politics. Routledge, Oxford and New York, NY. Wehrhahn, R. (2019) Contentious urban housing politicsinEuropean metropolises between financialization, dispossession and repossession. In R.Wehrhahn, J. Pohlan, C. Hannemann, F. Othengrafenand B. Schmidt- Lauber (eds.), JahrbuchStadtRegion 2017/2018. Housing and housing politics in European metropolises, Springer VS, Wiesbaden. Weißermel, S. (2021) The (im)possibility of agonistic politics: the Belo Monte dam and the symbolic order of dispossession. Geoforum 126, 91–100. Weißermel, S. (2023) Klimagerechtigkeit in der Stadtentwicklung im Bereich Wohnen: das Beispiel energetischer Quartierssanierung in Kiel- Gaarden [Climate justice in urban development in the field of housing: the example of energyefficient neighborhood refurbishment in Kiel- Gaarden]. In F.Othengrafen, J. Pohlan, B. Schmidt- Lauber and R.Wehrhahn (eds.), Jahrbuch StadtRegion 2021/2022. Stadt- Land- Relationen: disziplinäre Spurensuchen [Urbanrural relations: a disciplinary search for traces], Springer Nature, Wiesbaden.