The Complexities of Gentrification: Is it aDirty Word?Introduction An article was written on the Baltic Trianglewebsite with the headline, “Exciting new development comes to the Cains BreweryVillage.” (Jessett, 2017).
This new development takes a historically importantbuilding in Liverpool, United Kingdom, and transforms it into a new work spacefor “creative and digital industries.” (Jessett, 2017). In that same year, buton the opposite side of the pond, ‘Brooklyn is not for sale,’ is read on theshirts of hundreds of people at a protest in Brooklyn, New York.
Theborough-wide protest is against gentrification, a process that they prevalentlysee in their community (Bellamy-Walker, 2017). This uproar was partiallysparked due to the development project where an old historical armory isplanned to be turned into luxury apartments in the neighborhood (Bellamy-Walker,2017). Rewind three decades and, “Is Gentrification a Dirty Word?” read aheadline in the New York Times on December 23rd, 1985 (The Real EstateBoard of New York, 1985).The ad was purchased by The Real Estate Board of New York to defend gentrification,and their article is intended to convince the public that it is not a negativeprocess (Smith, 1996). Gentrification is a tricky concept but the purpose ofthis paper is to answer the question that was posed by The Real Estate Board ofNew York, “is gentrification a dirty word?” First, a brief origin of gentrificationis covered, and the term ‘gentrification’ is defined in multiple ways as theprocess is redefined.
In addition, the complex views of gentrification areexplored. Finally, the benefits and drawbacks will be thoroughly analyzed, anda conclusion will be drawn.Origin Theterm ‘gentrification’ was first coined in 1964 by Ruth Glass, a German UrbanSociologist (Jackson, 2017). The word came to be when she observed a lot of quartersin London transition from a working-class neighborhood to a predominately middleand upper-class neighbourhood (Glass, 1964). This demographic change alsoaltered the character of the communities; scruffy homes were transformed into stylishhouses and it brought new social character to the region (Glass, 1964). AlthoughGlass created the term, many people believe that gentrification has been a consistentpractice since the start of civilization; some even say that it is a form of colonialism(Jackson, 2017). Gentrification has roots and can be seen on every continent;from North America (August and Walks, 2017) to South America (Cummings, 2015),Europe (Ascensao, 2015) to Africa (Teppo and Millstein, 2015), and also Asia(Ha, 2015) to Ociena (Walters and McCrea, 2013). It is very prevalent andimportant to analyze.
Definition Theroot of the word gentrification is ‘gentry’ which are “people of high socialclass” (Anon, 2018. The Gentry). The original creation of the word was usedto describe middle and upper-class intrusion into working-class districts, andthe focus was on the rehabilitation of shabby properties that had a residentialpurpose (Glass, 1964). It was the process of neighborhood change to have highersocial class through private investment. Today, gentrification can be appliedto more than just residential properties, it involves vacant land, industrialareas and new build opportunities (Atkinson, 2004). It is quite hard to narrowdown a specific and current definition of gentrification because it can involvemultiple factors; it is not exclusive to residential properties, it can bestate-led or market led, it can be a new build or a revitalization of ahistoric district. Public Perception Today,gentrification can also be found in urban planning articles under names suchas, revitalization, renewal, regeneration, rejuvenation, etcetera.
It isdisguised because gentrification is seen as a ‘dirty word.’ To begin, scholarsare contested on the topic; many articles have been published that are eitheranti-gentrification, or pro-gentrification. When scholars are confused, thattypically leads the public to be confused. The public realm is bombarded withmedia outlet articles that claim gentrification to be negative; headlines read,”Stoked Croft ‘gentrification fears…,” “I feel guilty for gentrifying myneighbourhood…”, “Is gentrification causing rise in evictions?” (Wood, 2018., Noor,2018., Nathan, 2018.
). Although there are multiple negative repercussions,there are also many positive impacts involved with gentrification that shouldbe addressed.Positive Influence First,an argument for gentrification is the rehabilitation of neighborhoods. Older communitiesare great targets for gentrification because the lot sizes and the squarefootage of the homes are usually larger (Whyte, 2010). In many cases, statepolicy has influenced this revitalization to occur, not simply privateinvestment (Atkinson, 2002). The revitalization projects transform dilapidated communitiesinto attractive places that appeal to more and more people. Examples of thiscan be seen globally, but in Amsterdam, one development project has caught alot of people’s eyes because it does not involve a transformation oftraditional residences.
The run down Bijlmerbajes prison is planned to berevitalized into a new eco community (Anon, 2017. Old prison.). The new areawill incorporate multiple public and private spaces, this includes affordable rentalapartments, luxury condos, parks, art and health centers, and a school (Anon,2017. Old prison.
). This project is just one of the many examples ofneighbourhood enhancement that is brought on by gentrification. Anothermajor benefit that can occur from gentrification is improved monetary flow inthe economy. When homes are rehabilitated in a neighbourhood, it raises thevalue of homes in the area and this is one way to increase monetary flow(Atkinson, 2004). This property value increase can benefit home owners; bothnew and original to the neighbourhood. An example of this can be seen in theNorth American city of Toronto, Canada. Everyday there are articles posted asto why people should move to the city of Toronto and many explain what the up-and-comingneighbourhoods are (Krneta, 2017). Toronto has seen gentrification throughoutthe city for decades and it has majorly increased the average property value(Anon, 2017.
Toronto Homes). Between 2016 and 2017, property value has soared33% and that number is expected to increase again in 2018 (Anon, 2017. TorontoHomes). This is just one city out of many that have experienced a drastic increasein the real estate market due to gentrification.
Inaddition to increased property values, local services are revitalized andimproved for the community. There are studies which show that gentrificationcan improve the quality of shops and services (Henig and Gale, 1987). Jagerexplains that the new middle-class residents bring a ‘new circuit’ ofconsumption that opens a whole new market that can quickly become saturated (Jager,1986). An example of this is exemplified in the Melbourne, Australia in theearly 1980s. The gentrification process that created the cottage industry inMelbourne also opened up a new market for services such as cafes, restaurants,theatres and lounges (Mullins, 1982). These new markets also create new flowsof money that can improve the economy. Thelast major economic benefit of gentrification is increased tax revenue.
This isbecause cities have an increased quantity of houses and the residents of thesehouseholds are in higher tax brackets (Atkinson, 2002). There are multiplestudies with empirical evidence that further explains the benefit. A study conductedon the city of Philadelphia in the USA, first compiled an analysis of revenueflows and found that neighbourhood averages increased from 0.354 in 1975, to1.091 in the year 1981 (Lang, 1986). Furthermore, the study gauged the economicstrength of gentrification in the city; it subtracts the neighbourhoodimprovement costs from the total neighbourhood revenue and found that the areasare able to improve without a detrimental strain to economic resources (Lang,1986).
This increase in tax revenue directly relates to the improvement ofliving quality that was mentioned because this flow of revenue funds state-led gentrificationto further the process. Negative Repercussions Gentrificationalso comes with a slew of negative impacts; in contrast to the positive, the consequencesare usually social instead of economic. First, the most commonly talked aboutdrawback of gentrification is displacement. The work of Grier and Grier (1978),and LeGates and Hartman (1981), explain four types of displacement. First,direct last- resident displacement is an economic or physical force (ex.
Landlordincreases rent). Second is direct chain displacement; this is when residents(not the last residents) are forced to move out at an earlier stage.Exclusionary displacement is the third type and it is when housing has beengentrified or abandoned so they can no longer access housing. Last,displacement pressure is when there is a pressure to vacate because the neighborhoodis in transition (ex. Residents see all of their neighbours move due todisplacement and this pressures them to move as well) (Grier and Grier, 1978.,LeGates and Hartman, 1981.
). Displacement from gentrification is difficult to quantifiablyrecord because it usually involves movement from within a city and the data isvery limited (Marcuse, 2010). Although it is difficult, many studies piecetogether how gentrification causes displacement from a range of different times(Badcock and Cloher, 1980., Chan, 1986., Atkinson, 2000., Ascensao, 2015.
). Animpactful way to understand the negative impact of displacement is frompersonal accounts. An article in the Guardian records multiple experiences andopinions related to gentrification (Perry, 2016). Daniel DeBolt from SiliconValley, USA states: “My entirefamily has left..
. to more affordable places for the working class… Every timethere’s a boom, something like six times more jobs are created than homesbuilt. People are casually displaced every day and $1,000 a month rent hikesare not uncommon.” (Perry, 2016).
DeBolt’sexperience is a direct example of direct last- resident displacement and orchain displacement. This displacement is linked to the next drawback ofgentrification: the absence of a trickle- down effect. Thetrickle-down effect is a concept that is used in economics; it is the idea thatthe benefits of the wealthy flow, or ‘trickle-down’ to the middle andworking-classes, and it benefits everyone (Akinci, 2017). The trickle-downeffect is often used to dismantle gentrification doubters; people say thatalthough gentrification typically benefits the wealthy, it will ultimatelybenefit the poor too (Altshuler, 1969).
This concept is widely used, but it isnot necessarily true; gentrification does not always benefit the poor as muchas it widens the gap between classes (Lees, 2008). Even Richard Florida stated that,”the knowledge economy powers growth and generates class and geographicinequality at the same time.” (Florida, 2013). An example of this can been seenin Kensington and Chelsea boroughs of London, United Kingdom.
The Labour MP forKensington says, “the poor are getting poorer,” and “Their income is dropping… thereis no trickledown here.” (Anon,2017. Kensington). Kensington has gone through extensive gentrification withthe hopes that it will benefit everyone, but the gap between the rich and thepoor continue to grow. The average income is very high but the median income isvery low, these disparities show how large the gap is between social classes inone neighbourhood. There are multiple other arguments against gentrification butthese two above encapsulate the theme that surrounds the anti- gentrification argument;the process is socially unjust. Conclusion Gentrificationhas caused a divide between planners, policy makers, and commentators for manydecades; this division is very complicated.
As mentioned previously, there aremultiple positive impacts associated with gentrification, but the question mustbe asked, ‘who do they positively influence?’ There are examples of academicsusing empirical data to make the claim that all of the positive impacts only trulyimpact the wealthy (Atkinson, 2002). Atkinson concluded that when aneighbourhood is revitalized, the original residents are usually displaced beforethey can experience the benefits of gentrification (2004). Alicia Boyd, thelead organizer of the protest called “protect the people,” is quoted saying, “theyare just fumbling opportunities to build wealth for the 1%.
” (Bellamy-Walker, 2017). Protestors agree with herstatement that gentrification fosters inequality (Bellamy-Walker, 2017). There are people who believethat markets should be open and they would probably accept gentrification as anatural process that will inevitably happen (lees, et al., 2010).
In contrast manysay that gentrification shows how socially unjust the system really is throughstate-led gentrification and policy enabled gentrification (Lees, et al., 2010).The Real Estate Board of New York headlined their ad with the question, “isgentrification a dirty word?” This is a loaded question that is difficult toanswer because the topic is not as simple as many make it out to be. Currently,the public perception of the word is inherently ‘dirty,’ but some positives ofthe process include the revitalization of neighbourhoods, increased propertyvalues, improved services, and increased tax revenue. In contrast, the negativeimpacts of gentrification surround social issues such as community displacementand the increased gap between classes. The important point note from this paperis that gentrification is not black and white, instead, it is a very dynamicand complex issue. “Is gentrification a dirty word?”, the greater question ‘isgentrification a dirty process?’ ReferencesAkinci, M.
, 2017.Inequality and economic growth: Trickle-down effect revisited. DevelopmentPolicy Review, pp.1–24. Altchuler, A., 1969.
ThePotential of trickle down, Public Interest. Available at: https://www.nationalaffairs.com/storage/app/uploads/public/58e/1a4/aae/58e1a4 aaeb9a4059814787.pdf 46-56. Anon, 2017. Kensingtonand Chelsea: a wealthy but deeply divided borough. The Economist.
Available at:https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21723839- grenfell-tower-fire-has-become-stark-reminder-glaring-gap-between-rich-and- poor-even Accessed January 15, 2018. Anon, 2017.
Old prisonbecomes new eco city neighborhood | Springwise. Springwise.com.Available at: https://www.
springwise.com/old- prison-becomes-new-eco-city-neighborhood/Accessed January 15, 2018. Anon, 2017. Toronto homeprices soar a record 33%. Financial Post. Available at: http://business.financialpost.com/personal-finance/mortgages-real-estate/toronto- home-prices-soar-a-record-33-pushing-detached-house-to-almost-1-6-million Accessed January 16, 2018.
Anon, 2018. The Gentry. CambridgeAdvanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus. Availableat: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/gentry Accessed January 15, 2018. Ascendao, E., 2015.
Slumgentrification in Lisbon, Portugal: displacement and the imagined futures of an informalsettlement. In GlobalGentrification: Uneven development anddisplacement. Policy Press, pp. 37–58.
Atkinson, R., 2000.Measuring Gentrification and Displacement in Greater London, Urban Studies, 37, 149-165. Atkinson, R., 2002. DoesGentrification Help or Harm Urban Neighbourhoods? An Assessment of the Evidence-Base in the Context of the NewUrban Agenda. Available at:http://www.urbancentre.
utoronto.ca/pdfs/curp/CNR_Getrifrication- Help-or-.pdf Accessed January 16, 2018. Atkinson, R., 2004. Theevidence on the impact of gentrification: new lessons for the urban renaissance? InternationalJournal of Housing Policy, 4(1), pp.
107–131. August, M. & Walks,A., 2017. Gentrification, suburban decline, and the financialization of multi-family rental housing: Thecase of Toronto. Geoforum. Badcock, B.
and Cloher,D., 1980. The Conctribution of Housing Displacement to the Decline of the Boarding and LodgingPopulation in Adelaide, 1947-1977, Transactionsof the Institute of British Geographers, 151-169.
Bellamy-Walker, T.,2017. Protesters rally against gentrification, violence, racism in first borough-wide march. AmsterdamNews. Available at: http://amsterdamnews.com/news/2017/sep/21/protesters-rally-against- gentrification-violence-r/ AccessedJanuary 16, 2018. Chan, K. 1986.
EthnicUrban Space, Urban Displacement and Forced Relocation: The case of Chinatown in Montreal,Canadian Ethnic Studies. 65-78 Cummings, J., 2015.
Confrontingfavela chic: the gentrification of informal settlements in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. In Global Gentrification: Unevendevelopment and displacement.Policy Press, pp. 81–100. Florida, R., 2013. MoreLosers Than Winners in America’s New Economic Geography.
Citylab. Available at: https://www.citylab.com/life/2013/01/more- losers-winners-Americas-new-economic-geography/4465/Accessed January 16, 2018. Glass, R., 1964.
From”London: Aspects of Change”. In Thegentrification reader. p. 7. Grier, G. and Grier, E.
,1978. Urban Displacement: A Reconnaissance. Washington D.
C.: US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development. Ha, S., 2015. Theendogenous dynamics of urban renewal and gentrification in Seoul. In GlobalGentrification: Uneven development and displacement. Policy Press, pp.
165–180. Henig, J. and Gale, D.,1987. The Political Incorporation of Newcomers to Racially Changing Neighborhoods, Urban AffairsQuarterly, 22, 3, pp.
399-419. Jackson, L., 2017. TheComplications of Colonialism for Gentrification Theory and Marxist Geography. Journal of Lawand Social Policy, 27(1), pp.43–71. Available at:http://digitalcommons.osgoode.
yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article= 1266=jlsp AccessedJanuary 15, 2018. Jager, M., 2010.
ClassDefinition and the Aesthetics of Gentrification: Victoria in Melbourne. In The Gentrification Reader.Routledge, pp. 153–160. Jessett, E., 2017.Exciting new development comes to Cains Brewery Village.
Baltic Triangle. Available at:http://baltictriangle.co.uk/blog/2017/09/29/exciting-new- development-comes-to-cains-brewery-village/Accessed January 15, 2018. Krneta, A., 2017. Top 10Up and Coming Neighbourhoods in Toronto 2017.
Toronto Rentals. Available at:https://www.torontorentals.com/blog/top-up-and-coming- neighbourhoods-in-toronto Accessed January 16, 2018. Lang, M., 1986.Measuring Economic Benefits from Gentrification. Journal of Urban Affairs, 8(4), pp.
27–39. Lees, L., 2008.
Gentrification and Social Mixing: Towards an Inclusive Urban Renaissance? Urban Studies, 45(12),pp.2449–2470. LeGates, R. and Hartman,C., 198. ‘Displacement’, Clearinghouse Review 15 (July), pp.
207-249. Mullins, P., 1982. The’middle class’ and the inner city. Journal of Australian Political Economy, 11, pp.44–58. Nathan, D.
, 2018. Isgentrification causing rise in evictions? Maori Television. Available at:http://www.
maoritelevision.com/news/regional/gentrification-causing-rise- evictions Accessed January 16,2018. Noor, P., 2018. I feelguilty for gentrifying my neighbourhood. What should I do? The Guardian. Available at:https://www.
theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/jan/1 0/gentrifying-neighbourhood-guilty-in-it-together Accessed January16, 2018. Perry, F., 2016. We arebuilding our way to hell’: tales of gentrification around the world.
The Guardian. Availableat: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/05/building-way-to-hell-readers- tales-gentrification-around-world AccessedJanuary 16, 2018.
Teppo, A. &Millstein, M., 2015.
The place of gentrification in Cape Town. In Global Gentrification: Uneven development and displacement.Policy Press, pp. 419– 440. The Real Estate Board ofNew York. 1985.
Is Gentrification a Dirty Word? New York Times. Walters, P. & McCrea,R., 2013. Early Gentrification and the Public Realm: A Case Study of West End in Brisbane,Australia. Urban Studies, 51(2), pp.355–370. Available at:http://journals.
sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0042098013489748 Accessed January 15, 2018. Whyte, W., 2010.
TheCase for Gentrification. In The Gentrification Reader. Routledge, pp.452–454. Wood, A., 2018. StokesCroft ‘gentrification’ fears raised over Carriageworks development. Bristol Post.
Available at:http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol- news/stokes-croft-gentrification-fears-raised-1041391Accessed January 16, 2018.