From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Before (left) and after (right) photographs of a street in Mitte (Berlin) as an example of gentrification
Buildings on Mainzer Straße in Berlin
Gentrification is a process of renovating deteriorated urban neighborhoods by means of the influx of more affluent residents. This is a common and controversial topic in politics and in
urban planning.
Gentrification can improve the material quality of a neighborhood,
while also potentially forcing relocation of current, established
residents and businesses, causing them to move from a gentrified area,
seeking lower cost housing and stores.
Gentrification often shifts a neighborhood’s racial/ethnic
composition and average household income by developing new, more
expensive housing, businesses and improved resources.
Conversations about gentrification have evolved, as many in the
social-scientific community have questioned the negative connotations
associated with the word
gentrification. One example is that gentrification can lead to
community displacement
for lower-income families in gentrifying neighborhoods, as property
values and rental costs rise; however, every neighborhood faces unique
challenges, and reasons for displacement vary.
The gentrification process is typically the result of increasing
attraction to an area by people with higher incomes spilling over from
neighboring cities, towns, or neighborhoods. Further steps are increased
investments in a community and the related infrastructure by
real estate development businesses, local government, or
community activists and resulting
economic development, increased attraction of business, and lower
crime rates. In addition to these potential benefits, gentrification can lead to
population migration
and displacement. However, some view the fear of displacement, which is
dominating the debate about gentrification, as hindering discussion
about genuine progressive approaches to distribute the benefits of urban
redevelopment strategies.
Origin and etymology
Symbolic gentrification in Prenzlauer Berg, Berlin
The term gentrification has come to refer to a multi-faceted
phenomenon that can be defined in different ways. Gentrification is "a
complex process involving physical improvement of the housing stock,
housing tenure change from renting to owning, price rises and the
displacement or replacement of the working-class population by the new
middle class (Hamnett 2003).
Historians say that gentrification took place in
ancient Rome and in
Roman Britain, where large
villas were replacing small shops by the 3rd century, AD. The word
gentrification derives from
gentry—which comes from the Old French word
genterise, "of gentle birth" (14th century) and "people of gentle birth" (16th century). In England,
Landed gentry denoted the social class, consisting of
gentlemen.
Although the term was already used in English in the 1950s - for
instance by Sidney Perutz (Strange Reciprocity: Mainstreaming Women's
Work in Tepotzlan in the 'Decade of the New Economy',1955, p37) and by
William Xenophon Weed and Oscar Le Roy Warren (Warren's Weed on the New
York Law of Real Property, Volume 6, 1950, p. 67), British
sociologist Ruth Glass coined the term "gentrification" in 1964 to describe the influx of
middle-class people displacing
lower-class worker residents in urban neighborhoods; her example was
London, and its working-class districts such as
Islington:
One by one, many of the working
class neighbourhoods of London have been invaded by the
middle-classes—upper and lower. Shabby, modest mews and cottages—two rooms up and two down—have been taken over, when their leases
have expired, and have become elegant, expensive residences ... Once
this process of 'gentrification' starts in a district it goes on
rapidly, until all or most of the original working-class occupiers are
displaced and the whole social character of the district is changed.
In the US, the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report
Health Effects of Gentrification defines the
real estate concept of
gentrification
as "the transformation of neighborhoods from low value to high value.
This change has the potential to cause displacement of long-time
residents and businesses ... when long-time or original neighborhood
residents move from a gentrified area because of higher rents,
mortgages, and
property taxes. Gentrification is a housing, economic, and health issue that affects a community's history and culture and reduces
social capital.
It often shifts a neighborhood's characteristics, e.g., racial-ethnic
composition and household income, by adding new stores and resources in
previously run-down neighborhoods."
Scholars and pundits have applied a variety of definitions to
gentrification since 1964, some oriented around gentrifiers, others
oriented around the displaced, and some a combination of both. The first
category include Hackworth's definition "the production of space for
progressively more affluent users".
The second category include Kasman's definition "the reduction of
residential and retail space affordable to low-income residents".
The final category includes Rose, who describes gentrification as a
process "in which members of the 'new middle class' move into and
physically and culturally reshape working-class inner city
neighbourhoods".
In the
Brookings Institution report
Dealing with Neighborhood Change: A Primer on Gentrification and Policy Choices
(2001), Maureen Kennedy and Paul Leonard say that "the term
'gentrification' is both imprecise and quite politically charged",
suggesting its redefinition as "the process by which higher income
households displace lower income residents of a neighborhood, changing
the essential character and flavour of that neighborhood", so
distinguishing it from the different socio-economic process of
"neighborhood (or urban) revitalization", although the terms are
sometimes used interchangeably.
German
geographers
have a more distanced view on gentrification. Actual gentrification is
seen as a mere symbolic issue happening in a low number of places and
blocks, the symbolic value and visibility in public discourse being
higher than actual migration trends. E.g. Gerhard Hard assumes that
urban flight is still more important than inner city gentrification.
Volkskunde scholar Barbara Lang introduced the term 'symbolic gentrification' with regard to the
Mythos Kreuzberg in Berlin.
Lang assumes that complaints about gentrification often come from those
who have been responsible for the process in their youth. When former
students and bohemians started raising families and earning money in
better paid jobs, they become the yuppies they claim to dislike.
Especially Berlin is a showcase of intense debates about symbols of
gentrification, while the actual processes are much slower than in other
cities.
The city's Prenzlauer Berg district is, however, a poster child of the
capital's gentrification, as this area in particular has experienced a
rapid transformation over the last two decades. This leads to mixed
feelings amidst the local population. The neologism
Bionade-Biedermeier
was coined about Prenzlauer Berg. It describes the post-gentrifed
milieu of the former quartier of the alternative scene, where alleged
leftist alternative accessoires went into the mainstream. The 2013
Schwabenhass
controversy in Berlin put the blame of gentrification in Prenzlauer
Berg on well-to-do southern German immigrants and allowed for inner
German ethnic slurs, which in case of foreign immigration would have
been totally unacceptable.
American economists describe gentrification as a natural cycle:
the well-to-do prefer to live in the newest housing stock. Each decade
of a city's growth, a new ring of new housing is built. When the housing
at the center has reached the end of its useful life and is therefore
cheap, the well-to-do gentrify the neighborhood. The push outward from
the city center continues as the housing in each ring reaches the end of
its economic life. They observe that gentrification
has three interpretations: (a) "great, the value of my house is going
up, (b) coffee is more expensive, now that we have a Starbucks, and (c)
my neighbors and I can no longer afford to live here (community displacement.)
Causes
London and Palen
There
are several approaches that attempt to explain the roots and the
reasons behind the spread of gentrification. Bruce London and J. John
Palen (1984) compiled a list of five explanations:
- demographic-ecological,
- sociocultural,
- political-economical,
- community networks, and
- social movements.
Demographic-ecological
The
first theory, demographic-ecological, attempts to explain
gentrification through the analysis of demographics: population, social
organization, environment, and technology. This theory frequently refers
to the growing number of people between the ages of 25 and 35 in the
1970s, or the baby boom generation. Because the number of people that
sought housing increased, the demand for housing increased also. The
supply could not keep up with the demand; therefore cities were
"recycled" to meet such demands (London and Palen, 1984). The
baby boomers
in pursuit of housing were very different, demographically, from their
house-hunting predecessors. They married at an older age and had fewer
children. Their children were born later. Women, both single and
married, were entering the labor force at higher rates which led to an
increase of dual wage-earner households. These households were typically
composed of young, more affluent couples without children. Because
these couples were child-free and were not concerned with the conditions
of schools and
playgrounds, they elected to live in the
inner city in close proximity to their jobs. These more affluent people usually had white-collar, not blue-collar jobs. Since these
white-collar workers
wanted to live closer to work, a neighborhood with more white-collar
jobs was more likely to be invaded; the relationship between
administrative activity and invasion was positively correlated (London
and Palen, 1984).
Sociocultural
The
second theory proposed by London and Palen is based on a sociocultural
explanation of gentrification. This theory argues that values,
sentiments, attitudes, ideas, beliefs, and choices should be used to
explain and predict human behavior, not demographics, or "structural
units of analysis" (i.e., characteristics of populations) (London and
Palen, 1984). This analysis focuses on the changing attitudes,
lifestyles, and values of the middle- and upper-middle-class of the
1970s. They were becoming more pro-urban than before, opting not to live
in rural or even suburban areas anymore. These new pro-urban values
were becoming more salient, and more and more people began moving into
the cities. London and Palen refer to the first people to invade the
cities as "urban pioneers". These urban pioneers demonstrated that the
inner-city was an "appropriate" and "viable" place to live, resulting in
what is called "inner city chic" (London and Palen, 1984). The opposing
side of this argument is that dominant, or recurring, American values
determine where people decide to live, not the changing values
previously cited. This means that people choose to live in a gentrified
area to restore it, not to alter it, because restoration is a "new way
to realize old values" (London and Palen, 1984).
Political-economic
The
third theoretical explanation of gentrification is political-economic
and is divided into two approaches: traditional and Marxist. The
traditional approach argues that economic and political factors have led
to the invasion of the inner-city, hence the name political-economic.
The changing political and legal climate of the 1950s and 1960s (new
civil rights legislation, anti-discrimination laws in housing and employment, and
desegregation)
had an "unanticipated" role in the gentrification of neighborhoods. A
societal decrease in acceptance of prejudice led to more blacks moving
to the suburbs and whites no longer rejected the idea of moving to the
city. The decreasing availability of suburban land and inflation in
suburban housing costs also inspired the invasion of the cities. The
Marxist approach denies the notion that the political and economic
influences on gentrification are invisible, but are intentional. This
theory claims that "powerful interest groups follow a policy of neglect
of the inner city until such time as they become aware that policy
changes could yield tremendous profits" (London and Palen, 1984). Once
the inner city becomes a source of revenue, the powerless residents are
displaced with little or no regard from the powerful.
The
community-network approach is the fourth proposed by London and Palen.
This views the community as an "interactive social group". Two
perspectives are noted: community lost and community saved. The
community lost perspective argues that the role of the neighborhood is
becoming more limited due to
technological advances
in transportation and communication. This means that the small-scale,
local community is being replaced with more large-scale, political and
social organizations (Greer, 1962). The opposing side, the community
saved side, argues that community activity increases when neighborhoods
are gentrified because these neighborhoods are being revitalized,
Social movements
The
fifth and final approach is social movements. This theoretical approach
is focused on the analysis of ideologically based movements, usually in
terms of leader-follower relationships. Those who support
gentrification are encouraged by leaders (successful urban pioneers,
political-economic elites, land developers, lending institutions, and
even the Federal government in some instances) to revive the inner-city.
Those who are in opposition are the people who currently reside in the
deteriorated areas. They develop countermovements in order to gain the
power necessary to defend themselves against the movements of the elite.
An excellent example was the turned around gang in Chicago who fought
for years against the Richard J. Daley machine: the
Young Lords led by
Jose Cha Cha Jimenez.
They occupied neighborhood institutions and led massive demonstration
to make people aware. These countermovements can be unsuccessful,
though. The people who support reviving neighborhoods are also members,
and their voices are the ones that the gentrifiers tend to hear (London
and Palen, 1984).
As an economic process
Two discrete, sociological theories explain and justify gentrification as an economic process (
production-side theory) and as a social process (
consumption-side theory) that occurs when the suburban
gentry tire of the automobile-dependent
urban sprawl style of life; thus, professionals,
empty nest aged parents, and recent university graduates perceive the attractiveness of the city center—earlier abandoned during
white flight—especially if the poor community possesses a
transport hub and its architecture sustains the
pedestrian traffic that allows the proper human relations impeded by (sub)urban sprawl.
Furthermore, proximity to urban amenities such as transit stops
has been shown to drive up home prices over time. A survey of Northwest
Chicago conducted between 1975 and 1991 showed that homes located
directly in the vicinity Red Line and Brown Line stops of the "L" rail
transit system saw a huge price jump during these years, compared to
only modest increases for area outside the zone. Between 1985 and 1991
in particular, homes near transit stops nearly doubled in value.
Professor Smith and Marxist sociologists explain gentrification as a
structural economic process; Humanistic Geographer,
David Ley
explains gentrification as a natural outgrowth of increased
professional employment in the central business district (CBD), and the
creative sub-class's predilection for city living. "Liberal Ideology and
the Post-Industrial City" (1980) describes and deconstructs the TEAM
committee's effort to rendering Vancouver, BC, Canada, a "livable city".
The investigators Rose, Beauregard, Mullins, Moore
et al., who
base themselves upon Ley's ideas, posit that "gentrifiers and their
social and cultural characteristics [are] of crucial importance for an
understanding of gentrification"—theoretical work Chris Hamnett
criticized as insufficiently comprehensive, for not incorporating the
"supply of dwellings and the role of developers [and] speculators in the
process".
Production-side theory
The theory of urban gentrification derives from the work of human geographer
Neil Smith, explaining gentrification as an
economic process consequent to the fluctuating relationships among
capital investments and the production of
urban
space. He asserts that restructuring of urban space is the visual
component of a larger social, economic, and spatial restructuring of the
contemporary capitalist economy.
Smith summarizes the causes of gentrification into five main processes: suburbanization and the emergence of
rent gap,
deindustrialization, spatial centralization and decentralization of
capital, falling profit and cyclical movement of capital, and changes in
demographics and consumption patterns.
Suburbanization and rent gap
Suburban
development derives from outward expansion of cities, often driven by
sought profit and the availability of cheap land. This change in
consumption causes a fall in inner city land prices, often resulting in
poor upkeep and a neglect of repair for these properties by owners and
landlords. The depressed land is then devalued, causing rent to be
significantly cheaper than the potential rent that could be derived from
the "best use" of the land while taking advantage of its central
location. From this derives the Rent-gap Theory
describing the disparity between "the actual capitalized ground rent
(land price) of a plot of land given its present use, and the potential
ground rent that might be gleaned under a 'higher and better' use."
The rent gap is fundamental to explaining gentrification as an economic process. When the gap is sufficiently wide,
real estate developers,
landlords, and other people with vested interests in the development of land perceive the potential
profit
to be derived from re-investing in inner-city properties and
redeveloping them for new tenants. Thus, the development of a rent gap
creates the opportunity for urban restructuring and gentrification.
De-industrialization
The
de-industrialization of cities in developed nations reduces the number of
blue-collar jobs available to the urban working class as well as middle-wage jobs with the opportunity for
advancement,
creating lost investment capital needed to physically maintain the
houses and buildings of the city. Abandoned industrial areas create
availability for land for the rent gap process.
Spatial centralization and decentralization of capital
De-industrialization is often integral to the growth of a divided
white collar employment, providing
professional and
management
jobs that follow the spatial decentralization of the expanding world
economy. However, somewhat counter-intuitively, globalization also is
accompanied by spatial centralization of urban centers, mainly from the
growth of the inner city as a base for headquarter and executive
decision-making centers. This concentration can be attributed to the
need for rapid decisions and information flow, which makes it favorable
to have executive centers in close proximity to each other. Thus, the
expanding effect of suburbanization as well as agglomeration to city
centers can coexist. These simultaneous processes can translate to
gentrification activities when professionals have a high demand to live
near their executive workplaces in order to reduce decision-making time.
Falling profit and the cyclical movement of capital
This
section of Smith's theory attempts to describe the timing of the
process of gentrification. At the end of a period of expansion for the
economy, such as a
boom in postwar suburbs, accumulation of capital leads to a falling
rate of profit. It is then favorable to seek investment outside the industrial sphere to hold off onset of an
economic crisis.
By this time, the period of expansion has inevitably led to the
creation of rent gap, providing opportunity for capital reinvestment in
this surrounding environment.
Changes in demographic and consumption patterns
Smith emphasizes that demographic and life-style changes are more of an exhibition of the
form of gentrification, rather than real factors behind gentrification. The aging
baby-boomer
population, greater participation of women in the workforce, and the
changes in marriage and childrearing norms explain the appearance that
gentrification takes, or as Smith says, "why we have proliferating
quiche bars rather than Howard Johnson's".
Consumption-side theory
In contrast to the production-side argument, the
consumption-side
theory of urban gentrification posits that the "socio-cultural
characteristics and motives" of the gentrifiers are most important to
understanding the gentrification of the
post-industrial city.
The changes in the structure of advanced capitalist cities with the
shift from industrial to service-based economy were coupled with the
expanding of a new middle class—one with a larger purchasing power than
ever before. As such, human geographer
David Ley posits a rehabilitated post-industrial city influenced by this "new middle class".
The consumption theory contends that it is the demographics and
consumption patterns of this "new middle class" that is responsible for
gentrification.
The economic and cultural changes of the world in the 1960s have
been attributed to these consumption changes. The antiauthoritarian
protest movements of the young in the U.S., especially on college
campuses, brought a new disdain for the "standardization of look-alike
suburbs,"
as well as fueled a movement toward empowering freedom and establishing
authenticity. In the postindustrial economy, the expansion of middle
class jobs in inner cities came at the same time as many of the ideals
of this movement. The process of gentrification stemmed as the new
middle class, often with politically
progressive
ideals, was employed in the city and recognized not only the convenient
commute of a city residence, but also the appeal towards the urban
lifestyle as a means of opposing the "deception of the suburbanite".
This new middle class was characterized by professionals with life pursuits expanded from traditional economistic focus.
Gentrification provided a means for the 'stylization of life' and an
expression of realized profit and social rank. Similarly, Michael Jager
contended that the consumption pattern of the new middle class explains
gentrification because of the new appeal of embracing the historical
past as well as urban lifestyle and culture.
The need of the middle class to express individualism from both the
upper and lower classes was expressed through consumption, and
specifically through the consumption of a house as an aesthetic object.
Consumers' desire for "local" products and services has been used to
explain the effects of businesses such as craft breweries on
neighborhood gentrification.
These effects are becoming more widespread due to governments
changing zoning and liquor laws in industrial areas to allow buildings
to be used for artist studios and tasting rooms. Tourists and
consumption-oriented members of the new middle class realize value in
such an area that was previously avoided as a disamenity because of the
externalities of industrial processes. Industrial integration
occurs when an industrial area is reinvented as an asset prized for its
artists and/or craft beer, integrated into the wider community, with
buildings accessible to the general public, and making the neighbourhood
more attractive to gentrifiers.
Areas that have undergone industrial integration include the Distillery
District in Toronto and the Yeast Van area of east Vancouver, Canada.
"This permanent tension on two fronts is evident in the
architecture of gentrification: in the external restorations of the
Victoriana, the middle classes express their candidature for the
dominant classes; in its internal renovation work this class signifies
its distance from the lower orders."
Gentrification, according to consumption theory, fulfills the
desire for a space with social meaning for the middle class as well as
the belief that it can only be found in older places because of a
dissatisfaction with contemporary urbanism.
Economic globalization
Gentrification is integral to the
new economy of centralized, high-level services work—the "new urban economic core of
banking and service activities that come to replace the older, typically manufacturing-oriented, core"
that displaces middle-class retail businesses so they might be
"replaced by upmarket boutiques and restaurants catering to new
high-income urban élites". In the context of
globalization,
the city's importance is determined by its ability to function as a
discrete socio-economic entity, given the lesser import of national
borders, resulting in de-industrialized
global cities and
economic restructuring.
To wit, the American urban theorist
John Friedman's seven-part theory posits a bifurcated
service industry in
world cities,
composed of "a high percentage of professionals specialized in control
functions and ... a vast army of low-skilled workers engaged in ...
personal services ... [that] cater to the privileged classes, for whose
sake the world city primarily exists".
The final three hypotheses detail (i) the increased immigration of
low-skill laborers needed to support the privileged classes, (ii) the
class and caste conflict consequent to the city's inability to support
the poor people who are the service class, and (iii) the
world city as a function of social class struggle—matters expanded by
Saskia Sassen et al.
The world city's inherent socio-economic inequality illustrates the
causes of gentrification, reported in "Where Did They Go? The Decline of
Middle-Income Neighborhoods in Metropolitan America" (2006)
demonstrating
geographical segregation
by income in US cities, wherein middle-income (middle class)
neighborhoods decline, while poor neighborhoods and rich neighborhoods
remain stable.
Effects
As
rent-gap theory would predict, one of the most visible changes the
gentrification process brings is to the infrastructure of a
neighborhood. Typically, areas to be gentrified are deteriorated and
old, though structurally sound, and often have some obscure
amenity such as a historical significance that attracts the potential gentrifiers.
Gentry purchase and restore these houses, mostly for single-family
homes. Another phenomenon is "loft conversion," which rehabilitates
mixed-use areas, often abandoned industrial buildings or run-down
apartment buildings to housing for the incoming gentrifiers.
Such stabilization of neighbourhoods in decline and the corresponding
improvement to the image of such a neighbourhood is one of the arguments
used in support of gentrification.
While this upgrade of housing value is the superficial keynote to the
gentrification process, there is a greater number of less-visible shifts
the gentry bring with them into their new neighborhoods in the
community.
Gentrification is linked to a shift in the role of the state from
providing social welfare to providing business services and amenities.
Gentrification has been substantially advocated by local governments,
often in the form of 'urban restructuring' policies. Goals of these
policies include dispersing
low-income
residents out of the inner city and into the suburbs as well as
redeveloping the city to foster mobility between both the central city
and suburbia as residential options. The strain on public resources that often accompanies
concentrated poverty is relaxed by the gentrification process, a benefit of changed social makeup that is favorable for the local state.
Rehabilitation movements have been largely successful at
restoring the plentiful supply of old and deteriorated housing that is
readily available in inner cities. This rehabilitation can be seen as a
superior alternative to expansion, for the location of the central city
offers an intact
infrastructure that should be taken advantage of: streets, public transportation, and other urban facilities.
Furthermore, the changed perception of the central city that is
encouraged by gentrification can be healthy for resource-deprived
communities who have previously been largely ignored.
Gentrifiers provide the political effectiveness needed to draw more
government funding towards physical and social area improvements, while improving the overall quality of life by providing a larger tax base.
A change of residence that is forced upon people who lack resources to cope has social costs. Measures protecting these marginal groups from gentrification may reduce those.
There is also the argument that gentrification reduces the social
capital of the area it affects. Communities have strong ties to the
history and culture of their neighborhood, and causing its dispersal can
have detrimental costs.
The
Center for Disease Control and Prevention
has a webpage discussing adverse effects gentrification has on health,
and provides a list of policies that would inhibit gentrification in
order to prevent these impacts.
| Positive |
Negative
|
- Higher incentive for property owners to increase/improve housing
- Reduction in crime
- Stabilization of declining areas
- Increased property values
- Increased consumer purchasing power at local businesses
- Reduced vacancy rates
- Increased local fiscal revenues
- Encouragement and increased viability of further development
- Reduced strain on local infrastructure and services
- Increased social mix
- Rehabilitation of property both with and without state sponsorship
|
- Displacement through rent/price increases
- Loss of affordable housing
- Commercial/industrial displacement
- Unsustainable property prices
- Displacement and housing demand pressures on surrounding poor areas
- Community resentment and conflict
- Homelessness
- Secondary psychological costs of displacement
- Increased cost and charges to local services
- Loss of social diversity (from socially disparate to rich ghettos)
- Under occupancy and population loss to gentrified area
|
| Source: Loretta Lees, Tom Slater, and Elvin Wyly, Gentrification Reader, p. 196. © 2008 Routledge.; Rowland Atkinson and Gary Bridge, eds., Gentrification in a Global Context: the New Urban Colonialism, p. 5. © 2005 Routledge.
|
Displacement
The displacement of low-income residents is commonly referenced as a negative aspect of gentrification by its opponents. Residents of a gentrifying community may fear displacement by evictions or the increased costs of area real estate . This displacement can threaten to change an inner city working-class area into a “bourgeois playground”.
Displacement of lower-income families as a result of
gentrification has been a major issue for decades. However, research has
shown that oftentimes the opposite is true. Low-income families in
gentrifying neighborhoods are less likely to be displaced than in
non-gentrifying neighborhoods. A common theory has been that as affluent
people move into a poorer neighborhood, housing prices increase as a
result, causing poorer people to move out of the neighborhood. Although
there is evidence showing gentrification may modestly raise real estate
prices, numerous studies show that in many circumstances, other
benefits from gentrification such as lower crime and an improved local
economy outweigh the increased housing costs—displacement tends to
decrease in gentrifying areas such as these as a result.
A study from 2016 found that nearly 10,000 Hispanic families have had to move out of
Pilsen
in Chicago, Illinois, originally an Eastern European neighborhood which
had become predominantly Mexican by the 1970s. This has come as a
result of more wealthier people moving into the area. Chicago itself has
been going through a process of gentrification and displacement quite
rapidly in the past decade. When young often wealthier white people move
into areas historically of color it can cause the ethnic groups common
to the area to leave because of rent hikes.
Social changes
Many of the social effects of gentrification have been based on extensive theories about how
socioeconomic status
of an individual's neighborhood will shape one's behavior and future.
These studies have prompted "social mix policies" to be widely adopted
by governments to promote the process and its positive effects, such as
lessening the strain on public resources that are associated with
de-concentrating poverty. However, more specific research has shown that
gentrification does not necessarily correlate with "social mixing," and
that the effects of the new composition of a gentrified neighborhood
can both weaken as well as strengthen community cohesion.
Housing confers social status, and the changing norms that accompany gentrification translate to a changing social hierarchy.
The process of gentrification mixes people of different socioeconomic
strata, thereby congregating a variety of expectations and social norms.
The change gentrification brings in class distinction also has been
shown to contribute to residential
polarization by income, education, household composition, and race.
It conveys a social rise that brings new standards in consumption,
particularly in the form of excess and superfluity, to the area that
were not held by the pre-existing residents. These differing norms can lead to conflict, which potentially serves to divide changing communities.
Often this comes at a larger social cost to the original residents of
the gentrified area whose displacement is met with little concern from
the gentry or the government. Clashes that result in increased police
surveillance, for example, would more adversely affect young minorities
who are also more likely to be the original residents of the area.
There is also evidence to support that gentrification can
strengthen and stabilize when there is a consensus about a community's
objectives. Gentrifiers with an organized presence in deteriorated
neighborhoods can demand and receive better resources.
A characteristic example is a combined community effort to win historic
district designation for the neighborhood, a phenomenon that is often
linked to gentrification activity.
Gentry can exert a peer influence on neighbors to take action against
crime, which can lead to even more price increases in changing
neighborhoods when crime rates drop and optimism for the area's future
climbs.
Economic shifts
The
economic changes that occur as a community goes through gentrification
are often favorable for local governments. Affluent gentrifiers expand
the local tax base as well as support local shops and businesses, a
large part of why the process is frequently alluded to in urban
policies. The decrease in vacancy rates and increase in property value
that accompany the process can work to stabilize a previously struggling
community, restoring interest in inner-city life as a residential
option alongside the suburbs.
These changes can create positive feedback as well, encouraging other
forms of development of the area that promote general economic growth.
Home ownership is a significant variable when it comes to
economic impacts of gentrification. People who own their homes are much
more able to gain financial benefits of gentrification than those who
rent their houses and can be displaced without much compensation.
Economic pressure and market price changes relate to the speed of
gentrification. English-speaking countries have a higher number of
property owners and a higher mobility. German speaking countries provide
a higher share of rented property and have a much stronger role of
municipalities, cooperatives, guilds and unions offering
low-price-housing. The effect is a lower speed of gentrification and a
broader social mix.
Gerhard Hard sees gentrification as a typical 1970s term with more visibility in public discourse than actual migration.
Measurement
Whether
gentrification has occurred in a census tract in an urban area in the
United States during a particular 10-year period between censuses can be
determined by a method used in a study by
Governing:
If the census tract in a central city had 500 or more residents and at
the time of the baseline census had median household income and median
home value in the bottom 40th percentile and at the time of the next
10-year census the tract's educational attainment (percentage of
residents over age 25 with a bachelor's degree) was in the top 33rd
percentile; the median home value, adjusted for inflation, had
increased; and the percentage of increase in home values in the tract
was in the top 33rd percentile when compared to the increase in other
census tracts in the urban area then it was considered to have been
gentrified. The method measures the rate of gentrification, not the
degree of gentrification; thus,
San Francisco, which has a history of gentrification dating to the 1970s, show a decreasing rate between 1990 and 2010.
Scholars have also identified census indicators that can be used
to reveal that gentrification is taking place in a given area, including
a drop in the number of children per household, increased education
among residents, the number of non-traditional types of households , and a general upwards shift in income.
Gentrifier types
Just as critical to the gentrification process as creating a
favorable environment is the availability of the 'gentry,' or those who
will be first-stage gentrifiers. The typical gentrifiers are affluent
and have professional-level, service industry jobs, many of which
involve
self-employment.
Therefore, they are willing and able to take the investment risk in the
housing market. Often they are single people or young couples without
children who lack demand for good schools.
Gentrifiers are likely searching for inexpensive housing close to the
workplace and often already reside in the inner city, sometimes for
educational reasons, and do not want to make the move to suburbia. For
this demographic, gentrification is not so much the result of a return
to the inner city but is more of a positive action to remain there.
The stereotypical gentrifiers also have shared consumer
preferences and favor a largely consumerist culture. This fuels the
rapid expansion of trendy restaurant, shopping, and entertainment
spheres that often accompany the gentrification process.
Holcomb and Beauregard described these groups as those who are
"attracted by low prices and toleration of an unconventional lifestyle".
An interesting find from research on those who participate and
initiate the gentrification process, the "marginal gentrifiers" as
referred to by Tim Butler, is that they become marginalized by the
expansion of the process.
Research has also shown subgroups of gentrifiers that fall outside of
these stereotypes. Two important ones are white women, typically
single mothers, as well as white gay people who are typically men.
Women
Women
increasingly obtaining higher education as well as higher paying jobs
has increased their participation in the labor force, translating to an
expansion of women who have greater opportunities to invest. Smith
suggests this group "represents a reservoir of potential gentrifiers".
The increasing number of highly educated women play into this theory,
given that residence in the inner city can give women access to the
well-paying jobs and networking, something that is becoming increasingly
common.
There are also theories that suggest the inner-city
lifestyle
is important for women with children where the father does not care
equally for the child, because of the proximity to professional
childcare.
This attracts single parents, specifically single mothers, to the
inner-city as opposed to suburban areas where resources are more
geographically spread out. This is often deemed as "marginal
gentrification," for the city can offer an easier solution to combining
paid and unpaid labor. Inner city concentration increases the efficiency
of commodities parents need by minimizing time constraints among
multiple jobs, childcare, and markets.
Artists
Phillip Clay's two-stage model of gentrification places artists as prototypical stage one or "marginal" gentrifiers.
The National Endowment for the Arts
did a study that linked the proportion of employed artists to the rate
of inner city gentrification across a number of U.S. cities.
Artists will typically accept the risks of rehabilitating deteriorated
property, as well as have the time, skill, and ability to carry out
these extensive renovations.
David Ley
states that the artist's critique of everyday life and search for
meaning and renewal are what make them early recruits for
gentrification.
The identity that residence in the inner city provides is
important for the gentrifier, and this is particularly so in the
artists' case. Their cultural emancipation from the bourgeois makes the
central city an appealing alternative that distances them from the
conformity and mundaneness attributed to suburban life. They are
quintessential city people, and the city is often a functional choice as
well, for city life has advantages that include connections to
customers and a closer proximity to a downtown art scene, all of which
are more likely to be limited in a suburban setting. Ley's research
cites a quote from a Vancouver printmaker talking about the importance
of inner city life to an artist, that it has, "energy, intensity, hard
to specify but hard to do without" (1996).
Ironically, these attributes that make artists characteristic
marginal gentrifiers form the same foundations for their isolation as
the gentrification process matures. The later stages of the process
generate an influx of more affluent, "
yuppie" residents. As the
bohemian character of the community grows, it appeals "not only to committed participants, but also to sporadic consumers,"
and the rising property values that accompany this migration often lead
to the eventual pushing out of the artists that began the movement in
the first place. Sharon Zukin's study of SoHo in
Manhattan, NYC was one of the most famous cases of this phenomenon. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s,
Manhattan lofts in
SoHo were converted
en masse into housing for artists and hippies, and then their sub-culture's followers.
| Stages of Gentrification
|
| Early Stage |
Transitional Stage |
Late Stage
|
| Artists, writers, musicians, students, homosexuals, and political
activists move in to a neighbourhood for its affordability and
tolerance.
|
Middle-class professionals, often politically progressive (e.g.
teachers, journalists, librarians), are attracted by the vibrancy
created by the first arrivals.
|
Wealthier people (e.g. private sector managers) move in and real
estate prices increase significantly. By this stage, high prices have
excluded traditional residents and most of the types of people who
arrived in stage 1 and 2.
|
| Retail gentrification: Throughout the process,
local businesses change to serve the higher incomes and different tastes
of the gentrifying population.
|
| Source: Caulfield, 1994; Ley as cited in Boyd 2008a;
Boyd, 2008b; Rose, 1996; and Lees et al., 2008; as cited in Kasman,
Paul. (2015) “Public policy and gentrification in the Grandview Woodland
neighbourhood of Vancouver, B.C.” University of Victoria. Available
from http://hdl.handle.net/1828/6924.
|
Manuel Castells has researched the role of gay communities, especially in
San Francisco, as early gentrifiers. The film
Quinceañera depicts a similar situation in Los Angeles.
Flag Wars (Linda Goode Bryant) shows tensions as of 2003 between white
LGBT-newcomers and a black middle-class neighborhood in Columbus, Ohio.
Control
To counter the gentrification of their mixed-populace communities, there are cases where residents formally
organized
themselves to develop the necessary socio-political strategies required
to retain local affordable housing. The gentrification of a
mixed-income community raises
housing affordability to the fore of the community's politics. There are cities, municipalities, and counties which have countered gentrification with
inclusionary zoning (inclusionary housing)
ordinances requiring the apportionment of some new housing for the community's original low- and moderate-income residents.
Inclusionary zoning is a new
social
concept in English speaking countries; there are few reports qualifying
its effective or ineffective limitation of gentrification in the
English literature. The basis of inclusionary zoning is partial
replacement as opposed to displacement of the embedded communities.
In Los Angeles, California, inclusionary zoning apparently accelerated
gentrification, as older, unprofitable buildings were razed and replaced
with mostly high-rent housing, and a small percentage of affordable
housing; the net result was less affordable housing.
German (speaking) municipalities have a strong legal role in zoning and
on the real estate market in general and a long tradition of
integrating social aspects in planning schemes and building regulations.
The German approach uses en (milieu conservation municipal law), e.g.
in Munichs Lehel district in use since the 1960s. The concepts of
socially aware renovation and zoning of
Bologna's old city in 1974 was used as role model in the Charta of Bologna, and recognized by the
Council of Europe.
Other methods
Direct action and sabotage
When wealthy people move into low-income working-class neighborhoods, the resulting class conflict sometimes involves
vandalism and arson targeting the property of the gentrifiers. During the
dot-com boom of the late 1990s, the gentrification of San Francisco's predominantly working class
Mission District led some long-term neighborhood residents to create what they called the "Mission Yuppie Eradication Project".
This group allegedly destroyed property and called for property
destruction as part of a strategy to oppose gentrification. Their
activities drew hostile responses from the
San Francisco Police Department, real estate interests, and "work-within-the-system" housing activists.
Meibion Glyndŵr (
Welsh:
Sons of Glyndŵr), also known as the Valley Commandos, was a
Welsh nationalist movement violently opposed to the loss of
Welsh culture and
language.
They were formed in response to the housing crisis precipitated by
large numbers of second homes being bought by the English which had
increased house prices beyond the means of many locals. The group were
responsible for setting fire to
English-owned
holiday homes in
Wales
from 1979 to the mid-1990s. In the first wave of attacks, eight holiday
homes were destroyed in a month, and in 1980, Welsh Police carried out a
series of raids in
Operation Tân. Within the next ten years, some 220 properties were damaged by the campaign.
Since the mid-1990s the group has been inactive and Welsh nationalist
violence has ceased. In 1989 there was a movement that protested an
influx of Swabians to Berlin who were deemed as gentrification drivers.
Berlin saw the
Schwabenhass and 2013 Spätzlerstreit controversies, which identified gentrification with newcomers from the German south.
Canale delle Moline in Bologna
Zoning ordinances
Zoning ordinances and other
urban planning
tools can be used to recognize and support local business and
industries. This can include requiring developers to continue with a
current commercial tenant or offering development incentives for keeping
existing businesses, as well as creating and maintaining industrial
zones. Designing zoning to allow new housing near to a commercial
corridor but not on top of it increases foot traffic to local businesses
without redeveloping them. Businesses can become
more stable by
securing long-term commercial leases.
Although developers may recognize value in responding to living
patterns, extensive zoning policies often prevent affordable homes from
being constructed within urban development. Due to
urban density
restrictions, rezoning for residential development within urban living
areas is difficult, which forces the builder and the market into urban
sprawl and propagates the energy inefficiencies that come with distance
from urban centers. In a recent example of restrictive urban zoning
requirements, Arcadia Development Co. was prevented from rezoning a
parcel for residential development in an urban setting within the city
of Morgan Hill, California. With limitations established in the interest
of public welfare, a density restriction was applied solely to Arcadia
Development Co.'s parcel of development, excluding any planned
residential expansion.
Community land trusts
Because land
speculation
tends to raise property values, removing real estate (houses,
buildings, land) from the open market stabilizes property values, and
thereby prevents the economic eviction of the community's poorer
residents. The most common, formal
legal mechanism for such stability in English speaking countries is the
community land trust; moreover, many
inclusionary zoning ordinances formally place the "inclusionary" housing units in a
land trust. German municipalities and other cooperative actors have and maintain strong roles on the real estate markets in their realm.
Rent control
In jurisdictions where local or national government has these powers, there may be
rent control
regulations. Rent control restricts the rent that can be charged, so
that incumbent tenants are not forced out by rising rents. If applicable
to private landlords, it is a disincentive to speculating with property
values, reduces the incidence of dwellings left empty, and limits
availability of housing for new residents. If the law does not restrict
the rent charged for dwellings that come onto the rental market
(formerly owner-occupied or new build), rents in an area can still
increase. The cities of southwestern
Santa Monica and eastern
West Hollywood in
California, United States gentrified despite—or perhaps, because of—rent control.
Occasionally, a housing
black market
develops, wherein landlords withdraw houses and apartments from the
market, making them available only upon payment of additional
key money,
fees, or bribes—thus undermining the rent control law. Many such laws
allow "vacancy decontrol", releasing a dwelling from rent control upon
the tenant's leaving—resulting in steady losses of rent-controlled
housing, ultimately rendering rent control laws ineffective in
communities with a high rate of resident turnover. In other cases
social housing owned by local authorities may be
sold to tenants
and then sold on. Vacancy decontrol encourages landlords to find ways
of shortening their residents' tenure, most aggressively through
landlord harassment. To strengthen the rent control laws of
New York City, housing advocates active in
rent control in New York are attempting to repeal the vacancy decontrol clauses of rent control laws. The state of
Massachusetts abolished rent control in 1994; afterwards, rents rose, accelerating the pace of
Boston's
gentrification; however, the laws protected few apartments, and
confounding factors, such as a strong economy, had already been raising
housing and rental prices.
Examples
Inner London, England
Gentrification is not a new phenomenon in Britain; in
ancient Rome the shop-free forum was developed during the
Roman Republican period, and in 2nd- and 3rd-century cities in
Roman Britain there is evidence of small shops being replaced by large
villas.
“London
is being ‘made over’ by an urban centred middle class. In the post war
era, upwardly mobile social classes tended to leave the city. Now, led
by a new middle class, they are reconstructing much of inner London as a
place both in which to work and live” (Butler, 1999, p. 77).
King's College London academic Loretta Lees reported that much of
Inner London was undergoing "super-gentrification", where "a new group of super-wealthy professionals, working in the
City of London
[i.e. the financial industry], is slowly imposing its mark on this
Inner London housing market, in a way that differentiates it, and them,
from traditional gentrifiers, and from the traditional urban upper
classes ... Super-gentrification is quite different from the classical
version of gentrification. It's of a higher economic order; you need a
much higher salary and bonuses to live in
Barnsbury" (some two miles north of
central London).
Barnsbury was built around 1820, as a middle-class neighbourhood, but after the
Second World War
(1939–1945), many people moved to the suburbs. The upper and middle
classes were fleeing from the working class residents of London; the
modern railway allowed it. At the war's end, the great housing demand
rendered Barnsbury a place of cheap housing, where most people shared
accommodation. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, people moving into the
area had to finance house renovations with their money, because banks
rarely financed loans for Barnsbury. Moreover, the rehabilitating spark
was
The 1959 Housing Purchase and Housing Act, investing £100 million to rehabilitating old properties and
infrastructure.
As a result, the principal population influx occurred between 1961 and
1975; the UK Census reports that "between the years of 1961 and 1981,
owner-occupation increased from 7 to 19 per cent, furnished rentals
declined from 14 to 7 per cent, and unfurnished rentals declined from 61
to 6 per cent"; another example of urban gentrification is the super-gentrification, in the 1990s, of the neighboring working-class
London Borough of Islington, where Prime minister
Tony Blair moved upon his election in 1997.
The conversion of older houses into flats emerged in the 1980s as
developers saw the profits to be made. By the end of the 1980s,
conversions were the single largest source of new dwellings in London
(Hamnett, 1989).
Canada
As of 2011, gentrification in Canada has proceeded quickly in older and denser cities such as
Montreal,
Toronto,
Ottawa,
Hamilton and
Vancouver,
but has barely begun in places such as Calgary, Edmonton, or Winnipeg,
where suburban expansion is still the primary type of growth.
Canada's unique history and official multiculturalism policy has
resulted in a different strain of gentrification than that of the United
States. Some gentrification in Toronto has been sparked by the efforts
of business improvement associations to market the ethnic communities in
which they operate, such as in Corso Italia and Greektown.
In Quebec City. The Saint Roch district in the city's lower town
was previously predominantly working class and had gone through a period
of decline. However, since the early to mid 2000's, the area has seen
the derelict buildings turned into condos and the opening of bars,
restaurants and cafes, attracting young professionals into the area, but
kicking out the residents from many generations back. Several software
developers and gaming companies, such as Ubisoft and Beenox have also
opened offices there.
France
In Paris,
most poor neighborhoods in the east have seen rising prices and the
arrival of many wealthy residents. However, the process is mitigated by
social housing and most cities tend to favor a "social mix"; that is,
having both low and high-income residents in the same neighborhoods. But
in practice, social housing does not cater to the poorest segment of
the population; most residents of social dwellings are from the low-end
of the middle class. As a result, a lot of poor people have been forced
to go first to the close suburbs (1970 to 2000) and then more and more
to remote "periurban areas" where public transport is almost
nonexistent. The close suburbs (Saint-Ouen, Saint Denis, Aubervilliers,
...) are now in the early stages of gentrification although still poor. A
lot of high-profile companies offering well-paid jobs have moved near
Saint-Denis and new real-estate programs are underway to provide living
areas close to the new jobs.
On the other side, the eviction of the poorest people to
periurban areas since 2000 has been analyzed as the main cause for the
rising political far-right national front. When the poor lived in the
close suburbs, their problems were very visible to the wealthy
population. But the periurban population and its problem is mainly
"invisible" from recent presidential campaign promises. These people
have labelled themselves "les invisibles". Many of them fled both rising
costs in Paris and nearby suburbs with an insecure and ugly environment
to live in small houses in the countryside but close to the city. But
they did not factor in the huge financial and human cost of having up to
four hours of transportation every day. Since then, a lot has been
invested in the close suburbs (with new public transports set to open
and urban renewal programs) they fled, but almost nobody cares of these
"invisible" plots of land. Since the close suburbs are now mostly
inhabited by immigrants, these people have a strong resentment against
immigration: They feel everything is done for new immigrants but nothing
for the native French population.
This has been first documented in the book
Plaidoyer pour une gauche populaire by think-tank Terra-Nova which had a major influence on all contestants in the presidential election (and at least, Sarkozy,
François Hollande, and
Marine Le Pen).
This electorate voted overwhelmingly in favor of Marine Le Pen and
Sarkozy while the city centers and close suburbs voted overwhelmingly
for François Hollande.
Most major metropolises in France follow the same pattern with a
belt of periurban development about 30 to 80 kilometers of the center
where a lot of poor people moved in and are now trapped by rising fuel
costs. These communities have been disrupted by the arrival of new
people and already suffered of high unemployment due to the dwindling
numbers of industrial jobs.
In smaller cities, the suburbs are still the principal place
where people live and the center is more and more akin to a commercial
estate where a lot of commercial activities take place but where few
people live.
South Africa
Gentrification in
South Africa
has been categorized into two waves for two different periods of time.
Visser and Kotze find that the first wave occurred in the 1980s to the
Post-Apartheid period, the second wave occurred during and after the 2000s (2567).
Both of these trends of gentrification has been analyzed and reviewed
by scholars in different lenses. One view which Atkinson uses is that
gentrification is purely the reflection of
middle-class values on to a
working-class neighborhood (272).
The second view is the wider view is suggested by Visser and Kotze
which views gentrification with inclusions of rural locations, infill
housing, and luxury residency development (2567).
While Kotze and Visser find that gentrification has been under a
provocative lens by media all over the world, South Africa’s
gentrification process was harder to identify because of the need to
differentiate between gentrification and the change of conditions from
the
Apartheid (2569).
Furthermore, the authors notes that the pre-conditions for
gentrification where events like Tertiary Decentralization
(suburbanization of the service industry) and
Capital Flight
(disinvestment) were occurring, which caused scholars to ignore the
subject of gentrification due to the normality of the process (2569).
Additionally, Kotze and Visser found that as state-run programs and
private redevelopment programs began to focus on the pursuit of “global
competitiveness” and well-rounded prosperity, it hid the underlying
foundations of gentrification under the guise of redevelopment (2586).
As
a result, the effect is similar to what Teppo and Millstein coins as
the pursuit to moralize the narrative to legitimize the benefit to all
people (433).
This concurrently created an effect where Visser and Kotze conclude
that the perceived gentrification was only the fact that the target
market was people commonly associated with gentrification (2589).
As Visser and Kotze states, “It appears as if apartheid red-lining on
racial grounds has been replaced by a financially exclusive property
market that entrenches prosperity and privilege” (2585).
Generally, Atkinson observes that when looking at scholarly
discourse for the gentrification and rapid urbanization of South Africa,
the main focus is not on the smaller towns of South Africa. This is a
large issue because small towns are magnets for poorer people and
repellants for skilled people (271). In one study, Atkinson dives into research in a small town,
Aberdeen
in the East Cape. Also as previously mentioned, Atkinson finds that
this area has shown signs of gentrification. This is due to
redevelopment which indicates clearly the reflection of middle-class
values (272). In this
urbanization
of the area, Atkinson finds that there is clear dependence on
state-programs which leads to further development and growth of the
area, this multiplier of the economy would present a benefit of
gentrification (274).
The author then attributes the positive growth with the benefits in
gentrification by examining the increase in housing opportunities (276).
Then, by surveying the recent newcomers to the area, Atkinson’s
research found that there is confidence for local economic growth which
further indicated shifts to middle-class values, therefore,
gentrification (277).
This research also demonstrated growth in “modernizers” which
demonstrate the general belief of gentrification where there is value
for architectural heritage as well as urban development (284).
Lastly, Atkinson’s study found that the gentrification effects of
growth can be accredited to the increase in unique or scarce skills to
the municipality which revived interest in the growth of the local area.
This gentrification of the area would then negative impact the poorer
demographics where the increase in housing would displace and exclude
them from receiving benefits. In conclusion, after studying the small
town of Aberdeen, Atkinson finds that “Paradoxically, it is possible
that gentrification could promote economic growth and employment while
simultaneously increasing class inequality” (284).
Historically, Garside notes that due to the Apartheid, the
inner cities of
Cape Town was cleared of non-white communities. But because of the
Group Areas Act, some certain locations were controlled for such communities. Specifically,
Woodstock has been a racially mixed community with a compilation of
British settlers,
Afrikaners,
Eastern European Jews, Portuguese immigrants from
Angola and
Mozambique, and the colored
Capetonians. For generations, these groups lived in this area characterizing it be a working-class neighborhood.
But as the times changed and restrictions were relaxed, Teppo and
Millstein observes that the community became more and more “gray” as in a
combination between white and mixed communities.
Then this progression continues to which Garside finds that an
exaggeration as more middle-income groups moved into the area. This
emigration resulted in a distinct split between Upper Woodstock and
Lower Woodstock. Coupled with the emergence of a strong middle-class in
South Africa, Woodstock became a destination for convenience and growth.
While Upper Woodstock was a predominantly white area, Lower Woodstock
then received the attention of the mixed middle-income community. This
increase in demand for housing gave landlords incentives to raise prices
to profit off of the growing wealth in the area. The 400-500% surge in
the
housing market for Woodstock thus displaced and excluded the working-class and retired who previously resided in the community (33).Furthermore, Garside states that the progression of gentrification was
accentuated by the fact that most of the previous residents would only
be renting their living space (32).
Both Teppo and Millstein would find that this displacement of large
swaths of communities would increase demand in other areas of Woodstock
or inner city slums (430).
The
Bo-Kaap pocket of
Cape Town
nestles against the slopes of Signal Hill. It has traditionally been
occupied by members of South Africa's minority, mainly Muslim,
Cape Malay
community. These descendants of artisans and political captives,
brought to the Cape as early as the 18th century as slaves and
indentured workers, were housed in small barrack-like abodes on what
used to be the outskirts of town. As the city limits increased, property
in the Bo-Kaap became very sought after, not only for its location but
also for its picturesque cobble-streets and narrow avenues.
Increasingly, this close-knit community is "facing a slow dissolution of
its distinctive character as wealthy outsiders move into the suburb to
snap up homes in the City Bowl at cut-rate prices".
Inter-community conflict has also arisen as some residents object to
the sale of buildings and the resultant eviction of long-term residents.
In another specific case, Millstein and Teppo discovered that
working-class residents would become embattled with their landlords. On
Gympie Street, which has been labeled as the most dangerous street in
Cape Town, it was home to many of the working-class. But as
gentrification occurred, landlords brought along tactics to evict
low-paying
tenants
through non-payment clauses. One landlord who bought a building cheaply
from an auction, immediately raised the rental price which would then
proceed to court for
evictions.
But, the tenants were able to group together to make a strong case to
win. Regardless of the outcome, the landlord resorted to turning off
both power and water in the building. The tenants then were exhausted
out of motivation to fight. One tenant described it as similar to living
in a shack which would be the future living space one displaced (434).
Closing, the Teppo and Millstein’s research established that
gentrification’s progress for urban development would coincide with a
large displacement of the poorer communities which also excluded them
from any benefits to gentrification. To put it succinctly, the authors
state, “The end results are the same in both cases: in the aftermath of
the South African negotiated revolution, the elite colonize the urban
areas from those who are less privileged, claiming the city for
themselves” (437).
Italy
In
Italy, similarly to other countries around the world, the phenomenon of gentrification is proceeding in the largest cities, such as
Milan,
Turin,
Genoa and
Rome.
In Milan, gentrification is changing the look of some semi-central neighborhoods, just outside the inner ring road (called
Cerchia dei Bastioni), particularly of former working class and industrial areas.
One of the most well known cases is the neighborhood of
Isola.
Despite its position, this area has been for a long time considered as a
suburb since it has been an isolated part of the city, due to the
physical barriers such as the railways and the
Naviglio Martesana. In the 1950s, a new
business district
was built not far from this area, but Isola remained a distant and
low-class area. In the 2000s vigorous efforts to make Isola as a
symbolic place of the Milan of the future were carried out and, with
this aim, the Porta Garibaldi-Isola districts became attractors for
stylists and artists. Moreover, in the second half of the same decade, a massive urban rebranding project, known as
Progetto Porta Nuova, started and the neighborhood of Isola, despite the compliances residents have had, has been one of the regenerated areas, with the
Bosco Verticale and the new
Giardini di Porta Nuova.
Another semi-central district that has undergone this phenomenon in Milan is
Zona Tortona. Former industrial area situated behind
Porta Genova station, Zona Tortona is nowadays the mecca of Italian design and annually hosts some of the most important events of the
Fuorisalone during which more than 150 expositors, such as
Superstudio, take part. In Zona Tortona, some of important landmarks, related to culture, design and arts, are located such as
Fondazione Pomodoro, the
Armani/Silos,
Spazio A and
MUDEC.
Going towards the outskirts of the city, other gentrified areas of Milan are
Lambrate-Ventura (where others events of the
Fuorisalone are hosted),
Bicocca and
Bovisa (in which universities have contributed to the gentrification of the areas),
Sesto San Giovanni, Via Sammartini, and the so-called
NoLo district (which means
Nord di Loreto).
Poland
The biggest European ongoing gentrification process has been occurring in
Łódź
from the beginning of 2010s. Huge unemployment (24% in 1990s) caused by
the downfall of the garment industry created both economic and social
problems. Moreover, vast majority of industrial and housing facilities
had been constructed in the late 19th century and the renovation was
neglected after
WWII.
Łódź
authorities rebuilt the industrial district into the New City Center.
This included re-purposing buildings including the former electrical
power and heating station into the
Łódź Fabryczna railway station and the
EC1 Science Museum.
There are other significant gentrifications in Poland, such as:
Nowadays the Polish government has started National Revitalization Plan which ensures financial support to municipal gentrification programs.
Russia
Central
Moscow rapidly gentrified following the change from the Communist
central-planning policies of the Soviet era to the market economy and
pro-development policies of the post-Soviet Russian government.
United States
From
a market standpoint, there are two main requirements that are met by
the U.S. cities that undergo substantial effects of gentrification.
These are: an excess supply of deteriorated housing in central areas, as
well as a considerable growth in the availability of professional jobs
located in central business districts. These conditions have been met in
the U.S. largely as a result of suburbanization and other
postindustrial phenomena. There have been three chronological waves of
gentrification in the U.S. starting from the 1960s.
The first wave came in the 1960s and early 1970s, led by
governments trying to reduce the disinvestment that was taking place in
inner-city urban areas.
Additionally, starting in the 1960s and 1970s, U.S. industry has
created a surplus of housing units as construction of new homes has far
surpassed the rate of national household growth. However, the market
forces that are dictated by an excess supply cannot fully explain the
geographical specificity of gentrification in the U.S., for there are
many large cities that meet this requirement and have not exhibited
gentrification.
The missing link is another factor that can be explained by
particular, necessary demand forces. In U.S. cities in the time period
from 1970 to 1978, growth of the central business district at around 20%
did not dictate conditions for gentrification, while growth at or above
33% yielded appreciably larger gentrification activity.
Succinctly, central business district growth will activate
gentrification in the presence of a surplus in the inner city housing
market. The 1970s brought the more "widespread" second wave of
gentrification, and was sometimes linked to the development of artist
communities like SoHo in New York City.
In the U.S., the conditions for gentrification were generated by the economic transition from manufacturing to
post-industrial service economies. The post-
World War II
economy experienced a service revolution, which created white-collar
jobs and larger opportunities for women in the work force, as well as an
expansion in the importance of centralized administrative and cooperate
activities. This increased the demand for inner city residences, which
were readily available cheaply after much of the movement towards
central city abandonment of the 1950s. The coupling of these movements
is what became the trigger for the expansive gentrification of U.S.
cities, including
Atlanta,
Baltimore,
Boston,
Philadelphia,
St. Louis, and
Washington, D.C.
The third wave of gentrification occurred in most major cities in
the late 1990s and was driven by large-scale developments,
public-private partnerships, and government policies.
Measurement of the rate of gentrification during the period from 1990
to 2010 in 50 U.S. cities showed an increase in the rate of
gentrification from 9% in the decade of the 1990s to 20% in the decade
from 2000 to 2010 with 8% of the urban neighborhoods in the 50 cities
being affected.
Cities with a rate of gentrification of ≈40% or more in the decade from 2000 to 2010 included:
Cities with a rate of less than 10% in the decade from 2000 to 2010 included:
Atlanta
Gentrification in Atlanta has been taking place in its
inner-city neighborhoods
since the 1970s. Many of Atlanta's neighborhoods experienced the urban
flight that affected other major American cities in the 20th century,
causing the decline of once upper and upper-middle-class
east side neighborhoods. In the 1970s, after neighborhood opposition blocked two
freeways from being built through the east side, its neighborhoods such as
Inman Park and
Virginia-Highland
became the starting point for the city's gentrification wave, first
becoming affordable neighborhoods attracting young people, and by 2000
having become relatively affluent areas attracting people from across
Metro Atlanta to their upscale shops and restaurants. In the 1990s and 2000s, gentrification expanded into other parts of Atlanta, spreading throughout the historic
streetcar suburbs east of Downtown and Midtown, mostly areas that had long had black majorities such as the
Old Fourth Ward,
Kirkwood,
Reynoldstown and
Edgewood. On the western side of the city, once-industrial
West Midtown
became a vibrant neighborhood full of residential lofts and a nexus of
the arts, restaurants, and home furnishings. Gentrification by young
African Americans was also taking place in the 1990s in southwest
Atlanta neighborhoods. The
BeltLine
trail construction is expected to bring further gentrification in the
neighborhoods alongside which it runs. Concerns about displacement of
existing working-class black residents by increasing numbers of more
affluent whites moving in are expressed by author
Nathan McCall in his novel
Them, in The
Atlanta Progressive News, and in the documentary
The Atlanta Way.
Boston
The city of
Boston
has seen several neighborhoods undergo significant periods of urban
renewal, specifically during the 1960s to the 1980s. Called
"turbo-gentrification" by sociologist Alan Wolfe, particular areas of
study of the process have been done in South End, Bay Village, and West
Cambridge. In Boston's
North End, the removal of the noisy
Central Artery elevated highway attracted younger, more affluent new residents, in place of the traditional Italian immigrant culture.
- South End
In the early 1960s, Boston's
South End
had a great many characteristics of a neighborhood that is prime for
gentrification. The available housing was architecturally sound and
unique row houses in a location with high accessibility to urban
transport services, while surrounded by small squares and parks. A
majority of the area had also been designated a
National Historic District.
The South End became deteriorated by the 1960s. Many of the row
houses had been converted to cheap apartments, and the neighborhood was
plagued by dominant, visible poverty. The majority of the residents were
working-class individuals and families with a significant need for
public housing and other social services. The situation was recognized
by local governments as unfavorable, and in 1960 became the target of an
urban renewal effort of the city.
The construction of the
Prudential Tower
complex that was finished in 1964 along the northwest border of South
End was a spark for this urban-renewal effort and the gentrification
process for the area that surrounded it. The complex increased job
availability in the area, and the cheap housing stock of South End began
to attract a new wave of residents. The next 15 years saw an influx of
predominantly affluent, young professionals who purchased and renovated
houses in South End. Unfortunately, tension characterized the
relationship between these new residents and the previous residents of
the neighborhood. Clashes in the vision for the area's future was the
main source of conflict. The previous, poorer residents, contended that
"renewal" should focus on bettering the plight of South End's poor,
while new, middle-class residents heavily favored private market
investment opportunities and shunned efforts such as subsidized housing
with the belief that they would flood the market and raise personal
security concerns.
- Bay Village
The late 1940s was a transition for the area from primarily families
with children as residents to a population dominated by both retired
residents and transient renters. The 2–3 story brick row houses were
largely converted to low-cost lodging houses, and the neighborhood came
to be described as "blighted" and "down at heel". This deterioration was
largely blamed on the transient population.
The year 1957 began the upgrading of what was to become
Bay Village,
and these changes were mainly attributed to new artists and gay men
moving to the area. These "marginal" gentrifiers made significant
efforts towards superficial beautification as well as rehabilitation of
their new homes, setting the stage for realtors to promote the rising
value of the area.
Of the homebuyers in Bay Village from 1957 to 1975, 92% had
careers as white-collar professionals. 42% of these homebuyers were
25–34 years old. The majority of them were highly educated and moving
from a previous residence in the city, suggesting ties to an urban-based
educational institution. The reasons new homebuyers gave for their
choice of residence in Bay Village was largely attributed to its
proximity to downtown, as well as an appreciation for city life over
that of suburbia (Pattison 1977).
- West Cambridge
The development and gentrification of
West Cambridge began in 1960 as the resident population began to shift away from the traditional majority of working class
Irish immigrants.
The period of 1960–1975 had large shifts in homebuyer demographics
comparable to that experienced by Bay Village. Professional occupations
were overrepresented in homebuyers during this 15-year period, as well
as the age group of 25–34 years old. Residents reported a visible lack
of social ties between new homebuyers and the original residents.
However, displacement was not cited as a problem because the primary
reason of housing sale remained the death of the sole-surviving member
of the household or the death of a spouse.
Researcher Timothy Pattison divided the gentrification process of
West Cambridge into two main stages. Stage one began with various
architects and architectural students who were attracted to the
affordability of the neighborhood. The renovations efforts these
"marginal" gentrifiers undertook seemed to spark a new interest in the
area, perhaps as word of the cheap land spread to the wider student
community.
The Peabody Schools also served as an enticing factor for the new
gentrifiers for both stages of new homebuyers. Stage two of the process
brought more architects to the area as well as non-architect
professionals, often employed at a university institution. The buyers in
stage two cited Peabody schools and the socioeconomic mix of the
neighborhood as primary reasons for their residential choice, as well as
a desire to avoid job commutes and a disenchantment with the suburban
life.
Chicago
Chicago's gentrification rate was reported to be 16.8% in 2015.
But researchers have claimed that it has had a significant on specific
urban neighborhoods and led to destabilization of black and Latino
communities and their shared cultural identity.
Philadelphia: Darien Street
Gentrification Amid Urban Decline: Strategies for America's Older Cities, by Michael Lang, reports the process and impact (social, economic, cultural) of gentrification.
In particular, it focuses on the section of Darien Street (a
north-south street running intermittently from South to North
Philadelphia) which is essentially an alley in the populous
Bella Vista
neighborhood. That part of Darien Street was a "back street", because
it does not connect to any of the city's main arteries and was unpaved
for most of its existence.
In its early days, this area of Darien Street housed only Italian families; however, after the
Second World War
(1939–1945), when the municipal government spoke of building a
cross-town highway, the families moved out. Most of the houses date from
1885 (built for the artisans and craftsmen who worked and lived in the
area), but, when the Italian Americans moved out, the community's
low-rent houses went to poor African American families. Moreover, by the
early 1970s,
blighted Darien Street was at its lowest point as a community, because the houses held little
property value, many were abandoned, having broken heaters and collapsed roofs, etc.
Furthermore, the houses were very small — approximately 15 feet (4.6 m)
wide and 15 feet (4.6 m) deep, each had three one-room stories (locally
known, and still currently advertised as a "Trinity" style house) and
the largest yard was 8 feet (2.4 m) deep. Despite the decay, Darien
Street remained charmed with European echoes, each house was
architecturally different, contributing to the street's community
character; children were safe, there was no car traffic. The closeness
of the houses generated a closely knit community located just to the
south of
Center City,
an inexpensive residential neighborhood a short distance from the
city-life amenities of Philadelphia; the city government did not
hesitate to
rehabilitate it.
The gentrification began in 1977; the first house rehabilitated
was a corner property that a school teacher re-modeled and occupied. The
next years featured (mostly) white middle-class men moving into the
abandoned houses; the first displacement of original Darien Street
residents occurred in 1979. Two years later, five of seven families had
been economically evicted with inflated housing prices; the two
remaining families were renters, expecting eventual displacement. In
five years, from 1977 to 1982, the gentrification of Darien Street
reduced the original population from seven black households and one
white household, to two black households and eleven white households.
The average rent increased 488 per cent — from $85 to $500 a month; by
1981, a house bought for $5,000 sold for $35,000. Of the five black
households displaced, three found better houses within two blocks of
their original residence, one family left Pennsylvania, and one family
moved into a
public housing apartment building five blocks from Darien Street.
The benefits of the Darien Street gentrification included increased
property tax revenues and better-quality housing. The principal
detriment was residential displacement via higher priced housing.
Washington, D.C.
Gentrification in
Washington, D.C. is one of the most studied examples of the process, as well as one of the most extreme. The process in the
U Street Corridor and other downtown areas has recently become a major issue, and the resulting changes have led to
African-Americans dropping from a majority to a minority of the population, as they move out and middle-class whites and Asians have moved in.
Washington is one of the top three cities with the most
pronounced capital flow into its "core" neighborhoods, a measurement
that has been used to detect areas experiencing gentrification.
Researcher Franklin James found that, of these core areas,
Capitol Hill
was significantly revitalized during the decade of 1960–1970, and by
the end of the decade this revitalization had extended outward in a ring
around this core area. Dennis Gale studied these "Revitalization Areas," which include the
Dupont Circle,
Adams Morgan,
and Capitol Hill neighborhoods, and as compared to the rest of the city
found that these areas were experiencing a faster rate of
depopulation in the 1970s than the surrounding areas.
U.S. census data
show that in the Revitalization Areas, the percentage of the population
with four or more years of college education rose from 24% in 1970 to
47% in 1980, as opposed to an increase of 21% to 24% for the remaining
areas of Washington. Additionally, Gale's data show that in 1970, 73% of
the residents living in the Revitalization Areas had been residents
since 1965; however, in 1975, only 66% of the residents living there had
been residents of the area in 1970 as well.
The gentrification during this time period resulted in a
significant problem of displacement for marginalized city residents in
the 1970s. A decrease in the stock of affordable housing for needy households as well as non-
subsidized housing for low-income workers has had a burdensome effect on individuals and families.
As a result of gentrification, however, Washington's safety has
improved drastically. In the early 1990s, the city had an average of 500
homicides a year; by 2012, the rate had dropped by more than 80% to
about 100 before again seeing a 54% spike in 2015 over 2014. Many of the city's poorer residents were pushed out to adjacent
Prince George's County, Maryland and further south to
Charles County, Maryland. Prince George's County saw a huge spark of violent crimes in 2008 and 2009, but the rate has decreased since then.
San Francisco
A major driver of gentrification in
Bay Area cities such as
San Francisco has been attributed with the
Dot-Com Boom in the 1990s, creating a strong demand for skilled tech workers from local startups and nearby
Silicon Valley businesses leading to rising standards of living. Private shuttle buses operated by companies such as
Google have driven up rents in areas near their stops, leading to some
protests.
As a result, a large influx of new workers in the internet and
technology sector began contributing to the gentrification of
historically poor immigrant neighborhoods such as the
Mission District.
During this time San Francisco began a transformation, eventually
culminating in it becoming the most expensive city in which to live in
the United States.
From 1990 to 2010, 18,000 African Americans left San Francisco,
while the White, Asian, and Hispanic populations saw growth in the city. From 2010 to 2014, the number of households making $100,000 grew while households making less than $100,000 declined. According to the
American Community Survey,
during this same period an average of 60,000 people both migrated to
San Francisco and migrated out. The people who left the city were more
likely to be nonwhite, have lower education levels, and have lower
incomes than their counterparts who moved into the city. In addition,
there was a net annual migration of 7,500 people age 35 or under, and
net out migration of over 5,000 for people 36 or over.
Anti-gentrification protests
Movement for Justice in El Barrio
The
Movement for Justice in El Barrio is an immigrant-led, organized group
of tenants who resist against gentrification in East Harlem, New York.
This movement has 954 members and 95 building communities.
On 8 April 2006, the MJB gathered people to protest in the New York
City Hall against an investment bank in the United Kingdom that
purchased 47 buildings and 1,137 homes in East Harlem. News of these
protests reached England, Scotland, France and Spain. MJB made a call to
action that everyone, internationally, should fight against
gentrification. This movement gained international traction and also
became known as the International Campaign Against Gentrification in El
Barrio.
Cereal Killer Cafe protest
On
26 September 2015, a cereal cafe in East London called Cereal Killer
Cafe was attacked by a large group of anti-gentrification protestors.
These protestors carried with them a pig's head and torches, stating
that they were tired of unaffordable luxury flats going into their
neighbourhoods. These protestors were alleged to primarily be
"middle-class academics," who were upset by the lack of community and
culture that they once saw in East London.
People targeted Cereal Killer Cafe during their protest because of an
alleged article in which one of the brothers with ownership of the cafe
had said marking up prices was necessary as a business in the area.
After the attack on the cafe, users on Twitter were upset that
protestors had targeted a small business as the focus of their
demonstration, as opposed to a larger one.
San Francisco tech bus protests
The
San Francisco tech bus protests
occurred in late 2013 in the San Francisco Bay Area in the United
States, protesting against tech shuttle buses that take employees to and
from their homes in the Bay Area to workplaces in Silicon Valley.
Protestors said the buses were symbolic of the gentrification occurring
in the city, rising rent prices, and the displacement of small
businesses. This protest gained global attention and also inspired
anti-gentrification movements in East London.
ink! Coffee Protest (Denver, Colorado)
On November 22, 2017, ink! Coffee, a small coffee shop, placed a manufactured metal
Sandwich board sign on the sidewalk outside one of their
Denver locations in the historic
Five Points, Denver
neighborhood. The sign said “Happily gentrifying the neighborhood
since 2014” on one side and "Nothing says gentrification like being able
to order a cortado” on the other side.
Ink's ad ignited outrage and garnered national attention when a
picture of the sign was shared on social media by a prominent Denver
writer, Ru Johnson. The picture of the sign quickly went viral
accumulating critical comments and negative reviews. Ink! responded to
the social media outrage with a public apology followed by a lengthier
apology from its founder, Keith Herbert. Ink's public apology deemed
the sign a bad joke causing even more outrage on social media.
The ad design was created by a Five Points, Denver firm named
Cultivator, Advertising, and Design. The advertising firm responded to
the public's dismay by issuing an ill-received social media apology, "An
Open Letter to Our Neighbors".
Clean
up effort by the City of Denver at ink! Coffee in Five Points, Denver.
The coffee shop was vandalized following the debut of a controversial
ad campaign.
The night following the debut of ink's controversial ad campaign their
Five Points, Denver
location was vandalized. A window was broken and the words "WHITE
COFFEE" among others were spray-painted onto the front of the building.
Protest organizers gathered at the coffee shop daily following the
controversy. The coffee shop was closed for business the entire holiday
weekend following the scandal.
Five Points, Denver community demonstration in response to gentrification sidewalk ad created by ink! Coffee.
At least 200 people attended a protest and boycott event on November 25, 2017 outside of ink!'s Five Points location. News of the controversy was covered by media outlets worldwide.
Hamilton Locke Street Vandalism
On March 3, 2018, an anarchist group vandalized coffee shops, luxury automobiles, and restaurants on
Locke Street in
Hamilton, Ontario. The attack was linked to an
anarchist
group in the city known as The Tower, that aimed to highlight issues of
gentrification in Hamilton through vandalizing new businesses. On March 7, The Tower's free community library was vandalized by what the group referred to as "far-right goons". Investigation followed, with arrests related to the Locke Street vandalism being made by
Hamilton police in April and June 2018.
