The history is complicated, but it has a lot to do with the housing shortage in Amsterdam (and other places in NL) and the concept of a right-to-live. If many

The history is complicated, but it has a lot to do with the housing shortage in Amsterdam (and other places in NL) and the concept of a right-to-live. If many buildings in an area are sitting unoccupied, unused, and potentially falling apart while simultaneously affordable housing is unavailable, it becomes morally justifiable to squat. This is especially true if the landlord has had ample time to renovate, find tenants, or sell the property... If he has failed to do so, he is actually contributing to the shortage of affordable housing by driving prices up. Regulations permitting squatting put pressure on landlords, which seemed to work pretty well. Landlords used "anti-squat" tactics - renting out vacant properties on a temporary basis (i.e. with the option to evict at any moment) to prevent a squat. These rates were excellent in Amsterdam, and many students and would-be squatters took advantage of this, effectively bringing 'squatting' into the economy.