API tools faq
paste
jonstond2

Gentrification (Sociology)

jonstond2
Jul 18th, 2017
636
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 128.05 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. Introduction
  2.  
  3. In 1964 in an effort to describe and classify the transformation of the economic, demographic, commercial, cultural, and physical character of many central London neighborhoods Ruth Glass coined the term “gentrification.” In London: Aspects of Change, Glass observed that “The social status of many residential areas is being ‘uplifted’ as the middle class—or the ‘gentry’—moved into working-class space, taking up residence, opening businesses, and lobbying for infrastructure improvements.” She surmised that a “switch from suburban to urban aspirations,” urban renewal projects, and the movement of light manufacturing out of the central city, as well as the growing ranks of dual-income households and “the difficulties and rising costs of journeys to work” conspired to enable middle-class movement into disinvested neighborhoods. Glass warned that “London may soon be faced with an embarras de richesse in her central area—and this will prove to be a problem, too.” That is, Glass did not want the reader to conclude that the “uplift” she described was unambiguously desirous. Rather, she warned that, already in 1964, “Altogether there has been a great deal of displacement. All those who cannot hold their own—the small enterprises, the lower ranks of people, the odd men out—are being pushed away.” Glass and the process her words capture have induced more than four decades of scholarship—much of which pursues themes implicit in her 1964 book. Scholars in sociology and beyond pursue research that, among other goals and ends, seeks to document the contours of gentrification in a variety of settings, identify gentrification’s origins, and isolate its outcomes and consequences. Some disagree about how best to define gentrification, but nearly all agree that it is consequential for cities. For decades gentrification has had a central place in urban scholarship. As a result, our understanding of gentrification has expanded beyond the dynamics and actors Glass observed. We now know, for instance, about the role of middle- and upper-class African Americans in gentrification, the upscaling of rural villages, and the defining participation of corporations in “uplift.” Today, gentrification scholarship is enormously broad and diverse. For that reason, this bibliography is far from exhaustive. It highlights resources, such as readers and a textbook; representative and particularly influential publications; and markers of the literature’s heterogeneity. It does not seek to promote a specific definition of or explanation for gentrification, for contests over these matters are at the heart of the literature. In short, this bibliography seeks to provide a starting point for learning about and studying gentrification. Borrowing loosely from an organizing framework used elsewhere (see Brown-Saracino 2010 cited under General Overviews), the bibliography highlights overviews of gentrification scholarship, literature on how to define and identify gentrification, research on gentrification’s origins or causes, scholarship on gentrifiers, and articles and books that document and discuss gentrification’s outcomes—particularly its consequences for longtime residents, as well as for the places in which gentrification unfolds.
  4.  
  5. General Overviews
  6.  
  7. In 2007, the first textbook on gentrification was published (Lees, et al. 2007). The textbook, which provides an overview of key features of the gentrification literature, is a valuable resource for undergraduate and graduate students, as well as for scholars embarking on gentrification research. In addition, several edited volumes and two readers provide students and scholars with relatively short and accessible samples of scholarship on gentrification. Atkinson and Bridge 2005 introduces the reader to scholarship on the gentrification of spaces within and beyond the large, Western cities, such as London and New York, that have been the focus of much gentrification scholarship. Lees, et al. 2010 serves as companion to the Lees, et al. 2007 textbook, and Brown-Saracino 2010 introduces readers to four key areas of debate within the literature: how to define gentrification, the origins of the process, who are gentrifiers and why they engage in gentrification, and gentrification’s outcomes and consequences. Laska and Spain 1980, Palen and London 1984, and Smith and Williams 2007, each originally published in the 1980s, introduce the reader to formative scholarship conducted as gentrification took root in many cities. Finally, like the two aforementioned readers published in the 1980s, the review article Zukin 1987 provides an insightful overview and analysis of seminal features of the first two decades of gentrification scholarship.
  8.  
  9. Atkinson, Rowland, and Gary Bridge. 2005. Gentrification in a global context: The new urban colonialism. London: Routledge.
  10. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  11. Gentrification in a Global Context introduces the reader to important scholarship by a number of authors on the gentrification of spaces within and beyond the large Western cities, such as London and New York, that much gentrification scholarship takes as its focus. Topics include but are not limited to “studentification,” “aesthetic practice” in Poland and Polonia, “provincial gentrification,” and local limits to gentrification.
  12. Find this resource:
  13.  
  14. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2010. The gentrification debates. New York: Routledge.
  15. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  16. The Gentrification Debates introduces readers to four key areas of debate within the literature: how to define gentrification; the origins of the process; who are gentrifiers and why they engage in gentrification; and gentrification’s outcomes and consequences. Each area of debate opens with an introduction by the editor summarizing key themes and findings. In contrast to other edited volumes, the author makes analysis of the literature’s key debates—rather than interventions therein—the volume’s central goal.
  17. Find this resource:
  18.  
  19. Laska, Shirley Bradway, and Daphne Spain. 1980. Back to the city: Issues in neighborhood renovation. New York: Pergamon.
  20. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  21. Back to the City highlights seminal approaches to the study of gentrification, as well as key findings from the first decade and a half of gentrification scholarship. The book includes essays on the “rediscovery” of the central city, how to measure or document gentrification, and the simultaneous movement of middle-class populations back to the city and the country, providing a rich portrait of gentrification in the first decades after Ruth Glass coined the term.
  22. Find this resource:
  23.  
  24. Lees, Loretta, Tom Slater, and Elvin Wyly. 2007. Gentrification. New York and London: Routledge.
  25. DOI: 10.1068/a39329Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  26. Gentrification provides a thorough overview of the gentrification literature. The only one of its kind, the textbook, which is particularly attentive to the consequences of gentrification for longtime residents, is a valuable resource for undergraduate and graduate students, as well as for scholars embarking on gentrification research.
  27. Find this resource:
  28.  
  29. Lees, Loretta, Tom Slater, and Elvin Wyly. 2010. The gentrification reader. London: Routledge.
  30. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  31. This reader, which serves as companion to the editors’ textbook, Gentrification, includes excerpts from a diverse array of defining articles and chapters on gentrification. Sections on gentrification and urban policy and resistance to gentrification, and the book’s relation to Gentrification, distinguish it from other volumes.
  32. Find this resource:
  33.  
  34. Palen, J. John, and Bruce London. 1984. Gentrification, displacement and neighborhood revitalization. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
  35. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  36. Presenting case studies of the gentrification of neighborhoods in a number of cities and countries from Manhattan to Australia, this compilation of gentrification scholarship presents a window into formative research on facets of gentrification, such as displacement, ideologies that encourage gentrification, and renovators who engage in the transformation of properties and neighborhoods.
  37. Find this resource:
  38.  
  39. Smith, Neil, and Peter Williams. 2007. Gentrification of the city. New York and London: Routledge.
  40. DOI: 10.1068/a38476Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  41. Invites the reader to engage critically with gentrification, and introduces seminal topics in gentrification studies: the “chaos and complexity” of the concept (Beauregard), the role of gentrification in the taming of the urban “frontier” (Smith), the “esthetics” of gentrification (Jager), abandonment and displacement (Marcuse), and a number of additional topics and lines of inquiry that continue to shape the literature.
  42. Find this resource:
  43.  
  44. Zukin, Sharon. 1987. Gentrification: Culture and capital in the urban core. Annual Review of Sociology 13:129–147.
  45. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.so.13.080187.001021Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  46. Provides an insightful and thorough overview and analysis of seminal features of the first two decades of gentrification scholarship, and outlines a set of questions and problems that continue to shape the literature. Specifically, Zukin calls for the “integration of economic and cultural analysis,” and for analyses of the “cultural constitution” of elites in an advanced service economy.
  47. Find this resource:
  48.  
  49. Defining and Identifying Gentrification
  50.  
  51. Perhaps the best place to begin when contemplating how to define gentrification is the original source: introduction of the term gentrification to the urban lexicon in Glass 1964. Since then, countless scholars have offered their own definitions of gentrification, and have debated how best to define the term. For instance, they ask how central claims about the role of markets or cultural tastes should be to a definition, or whether gentrification must involve the renovation of existing housing stock. Recent overviews of debates about how to define the term and trends in defining gentrification can be found in Lees, et al. 2007 and Brown-Saracino 2010. Some scholars make questions about how to define gentrification the central thesis or topic of their article or book. In the sections that follow this line of work is categorized as “intervention.” Since gentrification scholarship began in earnest, scholars have periodically sought to intervene in how scholars and practitioners define gentrification, or otherwise to propose new ways of describing gentrification’s parameters. Some seek to broaden the set of indicators we rely on to identify the process, while others call for a reduction thereof. Such interventions have often pushed gentrification in new and productive directions, or encouraged scholars to rethink unexamined elements of our conceptions of the process. Others seek to outline gentrification’s history, and in so doing identify a set of indicators that we can use to identify gentrification. Still others contribute to debates about how best to define gentrification by attending to diverse or even unusual features of the process, such as geographies (e.g., rural enclaves), processes (e.g., nonresidential gentrification), and actors (e.g., low-income students who serve as first-wave gentrifiers), which standard definitions of gentrification might omit. By underlining atypical cases of gentrification, scholars pose questions that scholarship on gentrification’s origins also explores, namely about how to make sense of geographies, populations, and causal mechanisms that seem to depart from those Glass and other early scholars outlined.
  52.  
  53. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2010. The gentrification debates. New York: Routledge.
  54. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  55. The Gentrification Debates includes excerpts from book chapters and articles that emphasize the question of how to define gentrification. In addition, it includes a section introduction in which the editor analyzes the key themes, problems, areas of agreement and discord, and concepts that characterize this subset of the gentrification literature.
  56. Find this resource:
  57.  
  58. Glass, Ruth. 1964. London: Aspects of change. London: Centre for Urban Studies.
  59. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  60. In the introduction to London: Aspects of Change, Glass first wrote of “gentrification,” helping to inspire several decades of scholarship on the subject. The introduction paints a vivid portrait of the early gentrification of central London neighborhoods, and explores the origins of the process.
  61. Find this resource:
  62.  
  63. Lees, Loretta, Tom Slater, and Elvin Wyly. 2007. Gentrification. New York and London: Routledge.
  64. DOI: 10.1068/a39329Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  65. Gentrification provides an overview of key features of the gentrification literature, including a chapter on “The Birth of Gentrification,” which explores the defining characteristics of the gentrification Ruth Glass observed, as well as of later gentrification stages and parallel processes. A later chapter explores the contours of contemporary gentrification, and the characteristics it shares with earlier gentrification stages.
  66. Find this resource:
  67.  
  68. Interventions
  69.  
  70. Periodically, scholars seek to intervene in how researchers define and conceptualize gentrification; some call for gentrification research to proceed in new directions, encourage a reexamination of some of the central “facts” of the process, identify a potential resolution to ongoing definitional debates, or, in the case of Rose 1984, advocate against resolving some such debates. For instance, Atkinson 2003 and Davidson 2011 imply a set of questions about the stability of gentrification as a concept given how the contours of the process adjust in periods of economic growth and decline, particularly when the size and durability of the middle class changes, homeownership rates rise or fall, and lending practices alter. For her part, Rose calls for an embracement of gentrification as a “chaotic concept” and resists calls for the construction of a narrow definition (Rose 1984). More than two decades later, Tom Slater argues that gentrification’s meaning has changed, and its usage has become increasingly neutral (Slater 2006). He urges scholars to embrace a definition or conceptualization of gentrification that emphasizes its consequences, particularly displacement.
  71.  
  72. Atkinson, Rowland. 2003. Introduction: Misunderstood saviour or vengeful wrecker? The many meanings and problems of gentrification. Urban Studies 40.12: 2343–2350.
  73. DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136093Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  74. Writing in a moment of expanding gentrification, Atkinson introduces a special issue of Urban Studies by reflecting on past and current trends in gentrification scholarship. He notes, as the title suggests, the prevalence of work that casts the process as “both saviour and destroyer of central city vitality” (p. 2343), and outlines future research and conceptual trajectories.
  75. Find this resource:
  76.  
  77. Davidson, Mark. 2011. Critical commentary. Gentrification in crisis: Towards consensus or disagreement? Urban Studies 48.10: 1987–1996.
  78. DOI: 10.1177/0042098011411953Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  79. Davidson outlines two “crises” gentrification has faced: one, in his terms, ontological, and the other financial. With regard to the first, he summarizes and weighs in on debates about gentrification’s basic, defining features, and with regard to the second he explores the meaning and significance of the recent mortgage crisis and recession for gentrification.
  80. Find this resource:
  81.  
  82. Rose, Damaris. 1984. Rethinking gentrification: Beyond the uneven development of Marxist urban theory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2.1: 47–74.
  83. DOI: 10.1068/d020047Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  84. Rose argues that gentrification is a “chaotic concept”—one that scholars too often oversimplify. Rose argues that changes in production and reproduction helped to encourage the participation of moderate income and “alternative-lifestyle” households in gentrification.
  85. Find this resource:
  86.  
  87. Slater, Tom. 2006. The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 30.4: 737–757.
  88. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00689.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  89. Slater traces the changing meaning of gentrification among those who study it, calling for a return to critical scholarship that focuses on gentrification’s effects and that regards displacement as a defining feature of the process.
  90. Find this resource:
  91.  
  92. History
  93.  
  94. In two contrasting pieces, Neil Smith and Sharon Zukin provide alternate historical accounts for gentrification, with Smith 1996 emphasizing its emergence relative to changing economic conditions (a production explanation), and Zukin 1987 emphasizing cultural conditions (a consumption explanation) paralleling gentrification’s development.
  95.  
  96. Smith, Neil. 1996. A short history of gentrification. In The new urban frontier. By Neil Smith, 34–40. New York: Routledge.
  97. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  98. Smith argues that gentrification’s history extends to long before Ruth Glass coined the term. He points to several instances from the 19th century of “embourgeoisement” to outline historical linkages between such processes and what we think of today as “gentrification,” as well as to outline how gentrification takes new shape under neoliberalism.
  99. Find this resource:
  100.  
  101. Zukin, Sharon. 1987. Gentrification: Culture and capital in the urban core. Annual Review of Sociology 13:129–147.
  102. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.so.13.080187.001021Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  103. Zukin’s review article simultaneously provides a historical overview of the gentrification literature and of the process as it took root and expanded in American cities, emphasizing related economic and cultural changes that encourage the process.
  104. Find this resource:
  105.  
  106. Accounting for Diverse Geographies, Processes, and Actors
  107.  
  108. Some gentrification scholars explore the question of how best to define gentrification by posing questions about its parameters, specifically by advocating for or against the consideration of a process or dynamic as part and parcel of gentrification. For instance, Davidson and Lees 2005 enters the debate about whether the construction of new buildings, rather than the renovation or restoration of older properties, is part and parcel of gentrification, and Gotham 2005 presents a portrait of a gentrification fueled not only by individual actors, but also by corporations seeking to profit from a tourist economy aided and abetted by gentrification. Outlining the diversity of forms gentrification takes, Lees 2003 argues that “super-gentrification”—the movement of the very wealthy into already affluent neighborhoods—is at work in global cities, and Williams 1988 documents the character of “stalled gentrification” in Washington, DC. Together, these readings expand on the features of gentrification Glass 1964 (cited under Defining and Identifying Gentrification) outlined by identifying new actors and agents, stages, and strategies of gentrification. Finally, Rérat, et al. 2010 advocates for an expansive definition of gentrification—one that encapsulates many of the above variations or forms of gentrification, while Van Criekingen and Decroly 2003 provides a model for differentiating between gentrification and other forms of urban renewal.
  109.  
  110. Davidson, Mark, and Loretta Lees. 2005. New-build “gentrification” and London’s riverside renaissance. Environment and Planning A 37:1165–1190.
  111. DOI: 10.1068/a3739Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  112. Entering the debate about whether the construction of new buildings, as opposed to the renovation of existing housing stock, constitutes “gentrification,” Davidson and Lees point to the history and diversity of new-build gentrification and the displacement it can produce.
  113. Find this resource:
  114.  
  115. Gotham, Kevin Fox. 2005. Tourism gentrification: The case of New Orleans’ vieux carre (French Quarter). Urban Studies 42.7: 1099–1121.
  116. DOI: 10.1080/00420980500120881Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  117. Drawing on the case of New Orleans’ French Quarter, Kevin Fox Gotham traces the influence of corporations and the tourist industry on the neighborhood’s upscaling. He proposes that “tourism gentrification”—gentrification driven by corporations and tourist dollars—transformed the French Quarter, and argues that gentrification of this type possesses a distinct set of dynamics and qualities.
  118. Find this resource:
  119.  
  120. Lees, Loretta. 2003. Super-gentrification: The case of Brooklyn Heights, New York City. Urban Studies 40.12: 2487–2492.
  121. DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136174Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  122. Drawing on a case study of the Brooklyn Heights neighborhood, Lees documents the movement of the super-rich into an already gentrified neighborhood and attendant increases in property values. She proposes that we regard this process as “super-gentrification,” and concludes that it is taking place in global cities such as New York and London. Lees closes by posing pressing questions about what “super-gentrification” suggests about gentrification’s historical continuity.
  123. Find this resource:
  124.  
  125. Rérat, Patrick, Ola Söderström, and Etienne Piguet. 2010. New forms of gentrification: Issues and debates. Population, Space and Place 16.5: 335–343.
  126. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  127. This essay introduces a special issue of the journal Population, Space and Place on new forms of gentrification. The editors advocate for an expansive approach to gentrification—one that does not preclude new-build gentrification, indirect displacement, or the occurrence of gentrification in a broad range of geographies.
  128. Find this resource:
  129.  
  130. Van Criekingen, Mathieu, and Jean-Michel Decroly. 2003. Revisiting the diversity of gentrification: Neighbourhood renewal processes in Brussels and Montreal. Urban Studies 40.12: 2451–2468.
  131. DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136156Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  132. Drawing on a comparative study of gentrification in Brussels and Montreal, Van Criekingen and Decroly argue on behalf of the analytic distinction between “gentrification” and “neighborhood renewal.” They propose that distinct causal factors produce each, but that together they contribute to the transformation of many contemporary cities.
  133. Find this resource:
  134.  
  135. Williams, Brett. 1988. Upscaling downtown: Stalled gentrification in Washington D.C. Ithaca, New York: Cornell Univ. Press.
  136. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  137. Drawing on ethnographic research, Upscaling Downtown documents the contours of daily life in a Washington, D.C. neighborhood in which, as a result of a stalled housing market, gentrifiers and longtime residents live side by side. Williams is especially attentive to the diverse meanings residents of distinct backgrounds assign to facets of the neighborhood including and extending beyond its transformation.
  138. Find this resource:
  139.  
  140. Origins
  141.  
  142. Although the aforementioned work primarily attends to what questions—that is, what is gentrification?—alternate scholarship takes the question of why gentrification occurs as its central focus. Secondarily, some also seek to document and explain where gentrification occurs, and, in the process of doing so, contribute to explanations for gentrification’s causes or origins. Such questions take several forms, from explicit attempts to isolate core causal mechanisms—such as specific housing policies or the size of the baby-boom generation—to questions about why gentrification occurs in a certain time or place. Some scholars focus on the question of why gentrification occurs in distinct locales or at different moments (i.e., how to explain why one neighborhood or city gentrifies before another), while others explicitly seek to isolate the mechanisms, actors, or markets that fuel gentrification. As such, the second part of this bibliography is organized into two sections. The first includes scholarship that seeks to document and explain what Maloutas 2011 (cited under Contextual Diversity) refers to as gentrification’s “contextual diversity,” such as the gentry’s movement into a new-build or rural neighborhood, or the upscaling of an already very expensive Brooklyn neighborhood (see Lees 2003, cited under Accounting for Diverse Geographies, Processes, and Actors), and in so doing provide an account for both the “where” and “why” of gentrification. Importantly, an increasingly sizable and important subset of this literature asks questions about similarities and differences between the gentrification of the cities that many scholars have taken as the focus of their studies of gentrification—for example, New York and London—and those that have heretofore been underexamined, particularly those outside of North America and Europe. It is reasonable to predict that gentrification scholars will continue to expand their lens in coming decades, and that, as a result, this will sharpen our understanding of how context influences gentrification. The second part links gentrification more explicitly to specific actors, policies, or markets, documenting, for instance, the central role of government housing policies, or of changing middle-class tastes. Underlining much—although not all—of this literature is a debate about the role of and import of production and consumption factors in gentrification (see Smith and Williams 2007 and Zukin 1987, both cited under General Overviews). Some regard gentrification as a market and/or policy-driven process to which middle-class actors respond, while others cast the changing tastes of the middle class—for instance, the “suburban to urban aspirations” of Glass 1964 (cited under Defining and Identifying Gentrification)—as an organizing feature. Many others advocate for an explanation that falls somewhere between these two ends. For summaries of and interventions in the debate over consumption and production explanations for gentrification, useful resources include Hamnett 1991 and Ley 1986.
  143.  
  144. Hamnett, Chris. 1991. The blind men and the elephant: The explanation of gentrification. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 16.2: 173–189.
  145. DOI: 10.2307/622612Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  146. In this oft-cited article, Hamnett argues that the two dominant explanations for gentrification—Neil Smith’s rent-gap hypothesis and the production of gentrifiers explanation—are neither independently sufficient nor necessarily incompatible. Hamnett also provides an explanation for why scholars devote a great deal of attention to debate about gentrification’s origins, arguing that the debate reflects core elements of tensions in the study of human geography.
  147. Find this resource:
  148.  
  149. Ley, David. 1986. Alternative explanations for inner-city gentrification: A Canadian assessment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 76.4: 521–535.
  150. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1986.tb00134.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  151. Ley outlines and tests four dominant explanations for gentrification. Relying on correlation and regression analysis of gentrification in Canada, he finds economic and urban amenity factors to be of greatest influence, and provides an integrated model accounting for inner-city gentrification.
  152. Find this resource:
  153.  
  154. Contextual Diversity
  155.  
  156. What does gentrification look like in cities experiencing rapid new-build growth, such as Shanghai (He 2010)? How regionally specific are the contours of gentrification (Inzulza-Contardo 2011)? How do the key characteristics of gentrification vary in a given neighborhood as it advances (Kerstein 1990)? What form does gentrification take in affluent neighborhoods in global cities in which much wealth is concentrated (Lees 2003, cited under Accounting for Diverse Geographies, Processes, and Actors)? What accounts for similarities and differences between urban and rural gentrification in Scotland (Stockdale 2010)? How does gentrification unfold in a contemporary US city with an economically depleted urban core and more affluent outer rings (Reese, et al. 2010)? The case studies in this section tackle such questions and, together, present a portrait of the contextual factors that influence the who, what, why, and when of gentrification, and ask the reader to consider the origins and conceptual consequences of gentrification’s “contextual diversity” (Maloutas 2011). Other articles synthesize such research and the questions they raise about the limits and expansiveness of “gentrification”: Lees 2011, Maloutas 2011, Phillips 2004, and Phillips 2009.
  157.  
  158. He, Shenjing. 2010. New-build gentrification in central Shanghai: Demographic changes and socioeconomic implications. Population, Space and Place 16.5: 345–361.
  159. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  160. He documents demographic shifts in central Shanghai between 1990 and 2000, and documents the influence of two new-build gentrification projects in order to compare residents’ socioeconomic profiles in old neighborhoods and new-build areas. The study also investigates the influence of gentrification on displaced residents’ quality of life and socioeconomic prospects, and the author concludes by calling for critical gentrification scholarship.
  161. Find this resource:
  162.  
  163. Inzulza-Contardo, Jorge. 2011. “Latino gentrification”? Focusing on physical and socioeconomic patterns of change in Latin American inner cities. Urban Studies (14 November).
  164. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  165. Inzulza-Contardo introduces the question of why there is a dearth of scholarship on “Latino gentrification.” Investigating the gentrification of an inner-city neighborhood in Santiago, Chile, the author draws parallels between its transformation and the dynamics of gentrification in the region.
  166. Find this resource:
  167.  
  168. Kerstein, Robert. 1990. Stage models of gentrification. Urban Affairs Quarterly 25.4: 620–639.
  169. DOI: 10.1177/004208169002500406Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  170. Kerstein applies the stage-model theory of gentrification to a neighborhood in Tampa, Florida, concluding that stage models are useful but must be refined in order to account for the fact that gentrification is a “chaotic concept.”
  171. Find this resource:
  172.  
  173. Lees, Loretta. 2011. The geography of gentrification: Thinking through comparative urbanism. Progress in Human Geography (July): 1–17.
  174. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  175. This article takes as its primary subject the gentrification of cities in the Global South, exploring whether gentrification has moved from the Global North to the Global South, and encouraging scholars to take on “broad critiques around developmentalism, categorization and universalism.”
  176. Find this resource:
  177.  
  178. Maloutas, Thomas. 2011. Contextual diversity in gentrification research. Critical Sociology (July): 1–16.
  179. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  180. Maloutas argues that gentrification is a contextually specific process, and that scholars should only cautiously apply the term to areas outside of the Anglo-American context from which much gentrification scholarship has emerged. He further argues that identifying gentrification in an increasingly diverse set of areas risks identifying the process by its outcomes, rather than by its causal mechanisms, and, more generally, threatens the analytic precision of studies of “gentrification.”
  181. Find this resource:
  182.  
  183. Phillips, Martin. 2004. Other geographies of gentrification. Progress in Human Geography 28.5: 5–30.
  184. DOI: 10.1191/0309132504ph458oaSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  185. Phillips writes against the urban focus of the bulk of gentrification research, and considers the applicability of “gentrification” to rural and other geographical contexts. He argues that there is some commensurability in the gentrification of these diverse spaces, illustrating his argument with examples from the British countryside.
  186. Find this resource:
  187.  
  188. Phillips, Martin. 2009. Counterurbanisation and rural gentrification: An exploration of the terms. Population, Space and Place 16.6: 539–558.
  189. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  190. The paper explores the relation between “counterurbanization”—the movement of population into rural areas—and “rural gentrification.” Reviewing literature on each topic, the author assesses the degree to which each term captures the meaning of the other. Noting the “chaotic” nature of both concepts, Phillips provides an overview of the utility of each concept and calls on scholars studying each to learn and borrow from one another’s analytic foci.
  191. Find this resource:
  192.  
  193. Reese, Ellen, Geoffrey DeVerteuil, and Leanne Thach. 2010. “Weak-center” gentrification and the contradictions of containment: Deconcentrating poverty in downtown Los Angeles. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34.2: 310–327.
  194. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00900.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  195. The authors sketch an image of “weak-center” gentrification in downtown Los Angeles, isolating the role of housing/service displacement, the criminalization of poverty, and the combined work of certain nonprofits, government, and business and development interests in efforts to deconcentrate poverty and “revitalize” downtown.
  196. Find this resource:
  197.  
  198. Stockdale, Aileen. 2010. The diverse geographies of rural gentrification in Scotland. Journal of Rural Studies 26.1: 31–40.
  199. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2009.04.001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  200. Stockdale examines the repopulation of rural Scotland, identifying gentrification as one form of in-migration. She further argues that gentrification varies temporally and geographically, and that thinking about the form gentrification takes in rural areas has implications for how we define gentrification.
  201. Find this resource:
  202.  
  203. Causal Mechanisms
  204.  
  205. Gentrification scholars and actors on the ground proffer a diverse set of explanations for gentrification. These include those that spotlight the role of markets, housing, consumption, branding, middle-class tastes, commerce, and growth machines. Many explanations for gentrification are compatible. An individual article or book often traces gentrification to multiple, interacting sources. For instance, Immergluck 2009 (cited under Housing Policy and Politics) writes of how a planned rail trail, supported by local government agencies with an eye to economic development, appealed to the cultural tastes of potential gentrifiers, suggesting how government officials, market opportunities, and culture can conspire to encourage gentrification or alter the shape that it takes. Alternately, some present arguments about how one mechanism is of greatest influence. As an example, Smith and DeFilippis 1999 (cited under Markets) argues that the confluence between economic recession and gentrification’s slowed pace reveals the determining role of economics in gentrification.
  206.  
  207. Markets
  208.  
  209. A dominant account for gentrification emphasizes the determinative role of markets. The foundational article Smith 1979 introduces the author’s “rent-gap hypothesis,” which suggests that gentrification takes root in neighborhoods in which a gap between the current and potential value of urban properties induces gentrification. His hypothesis has been tested and expanded by many urban scholars. Some applications of the hypothesis are more direct than others. For instance, Lopez-Morales 2011 documents its role in the gentrification of Santiago, Chile. For its part, Shin 2009 identifies the role of a rent gap, as well as of external property-based interests and national housing policies in the gentrification of Seoul. Still others, such as Rousseau 2011, reveal the influence of specific market actors, or, in the case of Smith and DeFilippis 1999, of economic trends.
  210.  
  211. Lopez-Morales, Ernesto. 2011. Gentrification by ground rent dispossession: The shadows cast by large-scale urban renewal in Santiago de Chile. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 35.2: 330–357.
  212. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  213. Lopez-Morales applies the rent-gap hypothesis of Smith 1979 to the case of a low-income municipality of Santiago, Chile, identifying efforts to capitalize on the rent gap both by private owner-occupiers and the local government through urban renewal strategies benefiting a few large-scale developers.
  214. Find this resource:
  215.  
  216. Rousseau, Max. 2011. Post-Fordist urbanism in France’s poorest city: Gentrification as local capitalist strategy. Critical Sociology (April): 1–21.
  217. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  218. Rousseau demonstrates the role of local capital in inducing the gentrification of Roubaix, France. He thus concludes that, at least in declining cities, gentrification is driven less by key players in a global real estate market and more by local capitalists.
  219. Find this resource:
  220.  
  221. Shin, Hyun B. 2009. Property-based redevelopment and gentrification: The case of Seoul, South Korea. Geoforum 40.5: 906–917.
  222. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.06.009Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  223. Relying on a case study of Seoul, Shin argues that a set of factors facilitate gentrification: a rent gap, external property-based interests, and national housing policies that favor housing production and homeownership.
  224. Find this resource:
  225.  
  226. Smith, Neil. 1979. Toward a theory of gentrification: A back to the city movement by capital, not people. Journal of the American Planning Association 45.4: 538–547.
  227. DOI: 10.1080/01944367908977002Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  228. In this seminal article, Neil Smith proposes that a rent gap—a gap between the current and potential value of inner-city property—produces the opportunity for gentrification to take root and that this is gentrification’s central, defining causal mechanism.
  229. Find this resource:
  230.  
  231. Smith, Neil, and James DeFilippis. 1999. The reassertion of economics: 1990s gentrification in the Lower East Side. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 23.4: 638–653.
  232. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.00220Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  233. The article documents slowed gentrification during a recession in the 1980s, followed by the resurgence of the process in the 1990s. The authors argue that these trends reveal the powerful role of economics or markets in producing and shaping gentrification.
  234. Find this resource:
  235.  
  236. Housing Policy and Politics
  237.  
  238. A subset of gentrification scholarship attends to the role of housing policy and politics in enabling gentrification. Some, such as Goetz 2011; Wyly and Hammel 1999; and Kahn, et al. 2010, demonstrate how widely adopted policies change the terrain of a diverse array of cities. Others, such as Wyly and Hammel 2000 and Immergluck 2009, attend to specific housing policies, local actors, and their influence on a particular city or neighborhood.
  239.  
  240. Goetz, Edward. 2011. Gentrification in black and white: The racial impact of public housing demolition in American cities. Urban Studies 48.8: 1581–1604.
  241. DOI: 10.1177/0042098010375323Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  242. Goetz explores the demolition of public housing developments in high-poverty US neighborhoods as a case of state-sponsored gentrification. He finds a clear tendency toward the demolition of public housing projects with disproportionately high populations of African American residents, and traces the diverse paths of neighborhood change that public housing demolition produces.
  243. Find this resource:
  244.  
  245. Immergluck, Dan. 2009. Large redevelopment initiatives, housing values and gentrification: The case of the Atlanta beltline. Urban Studies 46.8: 1723–1745.
  246. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009105500Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  247. The paper explores the influence of a redevelopment initiative, the planned redevelopment of an abandoned rail line encircling central Atlanta, on property values. The author argues that the plans encouraged substantial speculation and gentrification.
  248. Find this resource:
  249.  
  250. Kahn, Matthew E., Ryan Vaughn, and Jonathan Zasloff. 2010. The housing market effects of discrete land use regulations: Evidence from the California coastal boundary zone. Journal of Housing Economics 19.4: 269–279.
  251. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhe.2010.09.001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  252. The authors explore the influence of land use regulations within a California coastal boundary zone on nearby housing, and explain how the boundary and related regulations shape gentrification.
  253. Find this resource:
  254.  
  255. Wyly, Elvin, and Daniel J. Hammel. 1999. Islands of decay in seas of renewal: Housing policy and the resurgence of gentrification. Housing Policy Debate 10.4: 711–771.
  256. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  257. The authors argue that between 1992 and 1997 many cities experienced a reversal of Berry’s “islands of renewal in seas of decay.” Instead, in eight US cities mortgage capital favored gentrified neighborhoods, and such cities increasingly possess seas of renewal and wealth.
  258. Find this resource:
  259.  
  260. Wyly, Elvin K., and Daniel J. Hammel. 2000. Capital’s metropolis: Chicago and the transformation of American housing policy. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography 82.4: 181–206.
  261. DOI: 10.1111/j.0435-3684.2000.00082.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  262. Relying on Chicago as a case study, Wyly and Hammel reveal how mortgage finance and assisted housing policies have been reframed since the 1990s to focus on individual responsibility, homeownership, and market processes. Together, this recasting and its effects constitute a “new regime” of neighborhood change.
  263. Find this resource:
  264.  
  265. Consumption and Urban Economies
  266.  
  267. Scholarship on gentrification and consumption argues that gentrifiers’ desire to consume certain dimensions of the city—whether pupusas in New York’s Red Hook (Zukin 2010), high-end restaurants or products (Zukin 1990), proximity to work, lifestyle amenities oriented toward the “creative class” (Atkinson and Easthope 2009) or dot-com workers (Centner 2008), a particular type of housing stock (Zukin 1982, cited under Culture and Urban Branding, and Ley 1986), “urbanity” (Ley 1996), or “authenticity” (Brown-Saracino 2004)—is a defining and driving feature of the process. This perspective implies the influence of consumption explanations for gentrification over and above production explanations, although some authors integrate these approaches. This integration is particularly apparent in work that focuses on the role of commerce in gentrification, from the establishment of commercial districts geared toward gentrifiers in Venice (Deener 2007) and Portland (Sullivan and Shaw 2011), to the article Zukin, et al. 2009 on the symbolic role of boutiques in gentrification.
  268.  
  269. Atkinson, Rowland, and Hazel Easthope. 2009. The consequences of the creative class: The pursuit of creative strategies in Australia’s cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33.1: 64–79.
  270. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00837.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  271. Atkinson and Easthope rely on interviews with community leaders to assess the application of creative-class planning in five Australian state capitals. They offer a typology of approaches to attracting the creative class, and analyze the consequences of those approaches for cities and especially for their most vulnerable residents.
  272. Find this resource:
  273.  
  274. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2004. Social preservationists and the quest for authentic community. City and Community 3.2: 135–147.
  275. DOI: 10.1111/j.1535-6841.2004.00073.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  276. Brown-Saracino argues that the literature provides an oversimplified image of the gentrifier as “pioneer,” neglecting the heterogeneity of gentrifiers’ beliefs and practices. She reports that half of the gentrifiers she interviewed in four distinct gentrifying communities moved in search of “authentic” community associated with “old-timers” and seek to preserve this authenticity to maintain the value of their place of residence. She terms such gentrifiers “social preservationists.”
  277. Find this resource:
  278.  
  279. Centner, R. 2008. Places of privileged consumption practices: Spatial capital, the dot-com habitus, and San Francisco’s Internet boom. City & Community 7.3: 193–223.
  280. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2008.00258.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  281. The author explores how former dot-com workers’ spatialized consumption practices influenced San Francisco.
  282. Find this resource:
  283.  
  284. Deener, Andrew. 2007. Commerce as the structure and symbol of neighborhood life: Reshaping the meaning of community in Venice, California. City and Community 6.4: 291–314.
  285. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2007.00229.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  286. Deener explores how the branding of a commercial district in Venice, California, simultaneously redraws community boundaries to exclude low-income, longtime residents and marks the neighborhood as “anti-corporate” and “independent” and therefore as an attractive space for investment and gentrification.
  287. Find this resource:
  288.  
  289. Ley, David. 1986. Alternative explanations for inner-city gentrification: A Canadian assessment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 76.4: 521–535.
  290. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1986.tb00134.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  291. Ley finds that economic factors do not alone drive gentrification. Rather, urban amenity factors are also of influence; that is, he concludes that taste for particular amenities and economic factors together account for inner-city gentrification.
  292. Find this resource:
  293.  
  294. Ley, David. 1996. The new middle class and the remaking of the central city. London: Oxford Univ. Press.
  295. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  296. Ley charts the relation between the rise of the “new middle class,” composed of professional and managerial workers, and of gentrification in six Canadian cities. Motivated in part by 1960s social movements, Ley characterizes the class as key participants in gentrification whose participation is driven in large part by a revised vision of the central city as an “oppositional site” to the suburbs.
  297. Find this resource:
  298.  
  299. Sullivan, Daniel Monroe, and Samuel C. Shaw. 2011. Retail gentrification and race: The case of Alberta Street in Portland, Oregon. Urban Affairs Review 47.3: 403–422.
  300. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  301. Drawing on a study of Portland, Oregon’s Alberta Street, Sullivan and Shaw detail how the marketing of a commercial district to the “creative class” can be hostile to some longtime residents, while simultaneously encouraging gentrification.
  302. Find this resource:
  303.  
  304. Zukin, Sharon. 1990. Socio-spatial prototypes of a new organization of consumption: The role of real cultural capital. Sociology 24.1: 37–56.
  305. DOI: 10.1177/0038038590024001005Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  306. Zukin examines how circuits of cultural capital operate in two cases: gentrification and Disney World. In so doing, she points to a new organization of consumption oriented toward high-end consumers.
  307. Find this resource:
  308.  
  309. Zukin, Sharon. 2010. Naked city: The death and life of authentic urban places. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
  310. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  311. Naked City contemplates the forces that propel and threaten “authenticity” and neighborhood in contemporary New York, focusing on the relation among gentrification, neoliberal social policies, and the city’s growing dependence on tourism. Relying on case studies of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, Harlem, the East Village, Red Hook, and Union Square, Zukin demonstrates how together these forces enable the construction of IKEA and threaten the autonomy and existence of pupusa vendors and community gardens.
  312. Find this resource:
  313.  
  314. Zukin, Sharon, Valerie Trujillo, Peter Frase, Danielle Jackson, Tim Recuber, and Abraham Walker. 2009. New retail capital and neighborhood change: Boutiques and gentrification in New York City. City and Community 8.1: 47–64.
  315. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2009.01269.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  316. The authors argue that certain types of commercial establishments have become emblematic of gentrification, marking its arrival and welcoming its progress. They examine the influence of these establishments in two New York neighborhoods, Harlem and Williamsburg, noting their contribution to the displacement of long-standing businesses and residents.
  317. Find this resource:
  318.  
  319. Culture and Urban Branding
  320.  
  321. The gentrification literature on culture and urban branding builds off and speaks to the literature on culture and consumption. A portion of the literature explores how cities actively promote themselves as sites of consumption and gentrification. Works such as Zukin 1991 and Greenberg 2008 note that marketers and those who hire them often recognize the close relation between gentrification and middle-class consumption vital for the economies of many contemporary cities. Others, such as Ley 2003 (cited under the Arts and Artists), Lloyd 2005, and Zukin 1982, attend to more organic processes by which neighborhood reputations are produced, fueling subsequent gentrification and creating a neighborhood or city “brand.” Many such scholars indicate that such “brands” originate with the in-movement of artists, who serve as symbols inviting further investment in the neighborhood. However, they are also attentive to how commercial interests, politicians, and policymakers seek to harness place reputation for the project of economic revitalization and labor to make certain urban spaces accessible to those whom they regard as productive markers of an urban brand. That is, gentrifiers are both consumers and consumed as symbols of desirable space. The work Florida 2002 (cited under Middle-Class Reinvestment), on how cities can encourage the in-movement of the “creative class,” elucidates this goal. Finally, Hae 2011 reveals conflicts that may emerge as a result of successful neighborhood branding and gentrification, such as between nightlife establishments and gentrifiers in New York.
  322.  
  323. Greenberg, Miriam. 2008. Branding New York: How a city in crisis was sold to the world. New York: Routledge.
  324. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  325. Greenberg’s book traces the development of the New York City brand and its consequences for the city and its residents—particularly for those the brand ignores or deflects. In so doing, she reveals a political strategy that helped enable the gentrification of many of the city’s neighborhoods.
  326. Find this resource:
  327.  
  328. Hae, Laam. 2011. Dilemmas of the nightlife fix: Post-industrialisation and the gentrification of nightlife in New York City. Urban Studies 48.16: 3449–3465.
  329. DOI: 10.1177/0042098011400772Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  330. Using New York City as a case, Hae complicates the notion that nightlife venues simply enable gentrification by attracting tourists and potential gentrifiers, revealing conflicts that emerge between gentrifiers and nightlife establishments in their shared neighborhoods.
  331. Find this resource:
  332.  
  333. Lloyd, Richard. 2005. Neo-Bohemia: Art and commerce in the post-industrial city. New York: Routledge.
  334. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  335. Lloyd’s study of Chicago’s Wicker Park documents its initial gentrification by artists—attracted by the neighborhood’s grit, burgeoning arts’ scene, and proximity to downtown amenities—and subsequent influx of upscale businesses and “yuppies.” Lloyd demonstrates how artist-gentrifiers seek to distinguish themselves and Wicker Park from more affluent gentrifiers, and reveals the role of local institutions—from coffee shops to art galleries—and identities in gentrification processes.
  336. Find this resource:
  337.  
  338. Zukin, Sharon. 1982. Loft living: Culture and capital in urban change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
  339. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  340. Zukin’s landmark book charts the transformation of loft spaces in New York into artists’ work and living space. Loft Living demonstrates how artists’ “sweat equity,” together with government policies and real estate interests worked together to set the groundwork for the broad transformation of Manhattan’s industrial past in part by constructing and promoting the notion of “loft living” and associating it with gentrification.
  341. Find this resource:
  342.  
  343. Zukin, Sharon. 1991. Landscapes of power: From Detroit to Disney World. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
  344. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  345. Through a series of essays about places as diverse as Disney World and a steel town in West Virginia, Zukin demonstrates how politics, culture, and economy conspire to shape urban space. In a chapter, “Gentrification, Cuisine, and the Critical Infrastructure,” Zukin demonstrates the role of consumption in gentrification.
  346. Find this resource:
  347.  
  348. Growth Machines and Other Coalitions
  349.  
  350. A body of work on gentrification follows the highly influential work Logan and Molotch 1987, outlining the influence of “growth machines” or coalitions of powerful actors and institutions who seek to benefit from the city’s “revitalization.” This subset of gentrification scholarship outlines the unique coalitions and distinct outcomes they produce in a variety of geographic and economic contexts, from post-Soviet Moscow (Badyina and Golubchikov 2005) to contemporary Chicago (Pattillo 2007), New York’s Lower East Side (Mele 2000), London’s Docklands (Smith 1989), and New York (Smith 1996). Most emphasize contextually and temporally specific coalitions of private and public actors.
  351.  
  352. Badyina, Anna, and Oleg Golubchikov. 2005. Gentrification in central Moscow—A market process or a deliberate policy? Money, power and people in housing regeneration in Ostozhenka. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 87.2: 113–129.
  353. DOI: 10.1111/j.0435-3684.2005.00186.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  354. “Gentrification in Central Moscow” demonstrates how the gentrification of one neighborhood in post-Soviet Moscow parallels and departs from other gentrification processes and dynamics. The authors are particularly attentive to a network of actors that facilitate the process, notably a confluence of public and private forces.
  355. Find this resource:
  356.  
  357. Logan, John, and Harvey Molotch. 1987. Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
  358. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  359. Logan and Molotch propose that coalitions of powerful actors and institutions, from politicians to universities and newspapers, conspire to promote economic growth and in so doing indelibly shape the urban landscape. First and foremost, these coalitions, which they coin “growth machines,” prioritize property’s “exchange value” over and above its “use value.”
  360. Find this resource:
  361.  
  362. Mele, Christopher. 2000. Selling the Lower East Side: Real estate, culture and resistance in New York City. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press.
  363. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  364. Reviewing more than a century of the Lower East Side’s history, Mele demonstrates how political and economic actors worked together to reframe and “refurbish” the neighborhood. With keen attention to the neighborhood’s countercultural history, Mele reveals how that history has served as both a site of resistance to gentrification and of co-optation, as developers and politicians have harnessed the neighborhood’s countercultural reputation in the process of place marketing.
  365. Find this resource:
  366.  
  367. Pattillo, Mary. 2007. Black on the block: The politics of race and class in the city. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  368. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  369. Black on the Block introduces the reader to the movement of African American gentry into a neighborhood primarily populated by poor and working-class African Americans on Chicago’s Southside. Pattillo reveals conflicts that arise—from fights over public housing to whether one should fix a car on the street—and coalitions that the city, gentry, investors, and university form as they seek to “revitalize” the neighborhood.
  370. Find this resource:
  371.  
  372. Smith, Adrian. 1989. Gentrification and the spatial constitution of the state: The restructuring of London’s Docklands. Antipode 21.3: 232–260.
  373. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.1989.tb00190.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  374. Pointing to the simultaneous political and economic functions of the state, Smith examines state involvement in and influence on London’s Docklands redevelopment.
  375. Find this resource:
  376.  
  377. Smith, Neil. 1996. The new urban frontier: Gentrification and the revanchist city. London: Routledge.
  378. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  379. Neil Smith’s landmark The New Urban Frontier reveals how investors, city officials, and a “revanchist” ideology work together to “retake” New York and other cities. Smith details how under neoliberalism such actors present this transformation as inevitable and desirable even as it disrupts the lives and livelihoods of many.
  380. Find this resource:
  381.  
  382. Global Urban Strategy
  383.  
  384. Some gentrification scholars call for recognition of global economic circuits and of the role of global elites in contemporary gentrification. For instance, Güzey 2009 demonstrates how local actors rely on gentrification as a method of urban competitiveness in a global context, while the selections in Atkinson and Bridge 2005 (cited under General Overviews) reveal how gentrification, once largely imagined to be rooted in a North American and European context, is expanding in its global breadth, and Smith 2002 suggests that this expansiveness is no accident, tracing contemporary gentrification to global networks of capital and culture, and therefore describing gentrification as a global urban strategy.
  385.  
  386. Güzey, Özlem. 2009. Urban regeneration and increased competitive power: Ankara in an era of globalization. Cities 26.1: 27–37.
  387. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2008.11.006Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  388. Drawing on a case study of Ankara, Turkey, the author demonstrates the involvement of local government in the redevelopment of squatter housing areas as part of an effort to boost the city’s competitiveness in the global context.
  389. Find this resource:
  390.  
  391. Smith, Neil. 2002. New globalism, new urbanism: Gentrification as global urban strategy. Antipode 34.3: 427–450.
  392. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8330.00249Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  393. Smith proposes that the scale and basis for gentrification has changed. Specifically, he argues that the process is increasingly global and that circuits of global capital and cultural circulation are increasingly responsible for its production.
  394. Find this resource:
  395.  
  396. Middle-Class Residential Choices
  397.  
  398. Although the bulk of gentrification research acknowledges the role of the middle class or the “gentry” in gentrification—either as a group that drives gentrification or that responds to conditions that invite their in-movement—some devote particular attention to the specific mechanisms that influence the residential choices of members of the middle class. Among these are the efforts of estate agents in Sydney (Bridge 2001), New York branding efforts (Greenberg 2008, cited under Culture and Urban Branding), status competition in Shanghai (Wang and Lau 2009), and changing conceptions of work-life balance (Ward, et al. 2010).
  399.  
  400. Bridge, Gary. 2001. Estate agents as interpreters of economic and cultural capital: The gentrification premium in the Sydney housing market. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 25.1: 87–96.
  401. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.00299Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  402. Bridge outlines the key role of estate agents in articulating and promoting the aesthetic features of housing stock in the Sydney housing market. He concludes that they are pivotal facilitators of gentrification.
  403. Find this resource:
  404.  
  405. Wang, Jun, and Stephen Siu Yu Lau. 2009. Gentrification and Shanghai’s new middle-class: Another reflection on the cultural consumption thesis. Cities 26.2: 57–66.
  406. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.01.004Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  407. Relying on data from a survey of service industry professionals and managers, the authors demonstrate the role of the professional middle class in Shanghai’s gentrification. They argue that this class is willing and able to pay a higher price for the status associated with residence in gentrified or gentrifying urban neighborhoods.
  408. Find this resource:
  409.  
  410. Ward, Kevin, Colette Fagan, Linda McDowell, Diane Perrons, and Kathryn Ray. 2010. Class transformation and work-life balance in urban Britain: The case of Manchester. Urban Studies 47.11: 2259.
  411. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009359030Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  412. The authors turn to a suburb of Manchester to document how changing conceptions of work-life balance inform gentrification.
  413. Find this resource:
  414.  
  415. Gentrifiers
  416.  
  417. At the heart of many inquiries into gentrification is the question of who gentrifiers are and why they participate in the process. This line of investigation is particularly foundational in scholarship that adopts a consumption-oriented explanation for gentrification—that is, that regards gentrification as largely driven by gentrifiers’ taste for central city living. However, even those who regard gentrification as market driven often seek to document gentrifiers’ characteristics or to capture on a micro level their engagement in the process of which they are a part. Scholarship on gentrification generally pursues three foundational questions. The first two, which are closely related, ask who gentrifiers are and what their attitudes are toward the places they move to, their neighbors, and, less frequently, toward gentrification. The third question asks why individuals or classes of gentrifiers engage in gentrification. A dominant explanation suggests that they adopt a “pioneering” or “revanchist” ideology (Smith 1996, cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions) that justifies their reclamation of the central city. Others, such as Zukin 1982 and Lloyd 2005 (both cited under Culture and Urban Branding), demonstrate instances in which classes of gentrifiers—such as artists—move in search of affordable living space in an area populated by others who share their tastes and attitudes. They and other scholars demonstrate how this movement contributes to processes of capital accumulation and displacement in the central city. Over the past four decades scholars have posed various questions about the degree of gentrifiers’ homogeneity. Stage models of gentrification (Clay 1979, cited under Characteristics by Gentrification Stage) propose that gentrifiers’ characteristics and attitudes vary as gentrification advances, with artists and other first-wave gentrifiers eventually displaced by more affluent neighbors. Others seek to determine the degree to which gentrifiers’ relations with longtime residents are shaped by a common racial identity or dissimilar class backgrounds (e.g., Taylor 2002, cited under Class and Cultural Conflict; Pattillo 2007, cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions). Still others seek to chart when and how gentrifiers seek to build alliances with certain longtime residents (Brown-Saracino 2004, cited under Attitudes; Brown-Saracino 2009, cited under Characteristics by Gentrification Stage). Together, such work seeks to paint a portrait of a class of actors who play a central role in gentrification, however varied that class or its role may be.
  418.  
  419. Characteristics by Gentrification Stage
  420.  
  421. For decades scholars have argued that gentrification occurs in stages, and that each stage involves a distinct set of actors and outcomes. A foundational text is Clay 1979, which identifies the stages through which gentrification advances, and the characteristics of the gentrifiers Clay associates with each stage. Importantly, he also suggests that gentrifiers’ attitudes and relations with longtime residents change with gentrification stage. Others, such as Kerstein 1990 (cited under Contextual Diversity) and Brown-Saracino 2009, simultaneously adopt and complicate this formulation. Kerstein 1990 suggests that gentrification is a “chaotic concept” and, as a result, that stages vary by context, and Brown-Saracino 2009 finds that gentrifiers’ attitudes do not always neatly correspond with gentrification stage. Still others, such as Lloyd 2005 and Ocejo 2011, conduct case studies of gentrifiers associated with a specific gentrification stage.
  422.  
  423. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2009. A neighborhood that never changes: Gentrification, social preservation and the search for authenticity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  424. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  425. Drawing on ethnographies of four gentrifying communities at distinct stages of gentrification, Brown-Saracino identifies ideological and behavioral variation among gentrifiers. However, contra much literature on gentrification stage, she finds that gentrifiers’ attitudes about gentrification and longtime residents do not depend on gentrification stage or duration of time in a neighborhood. Instead, previous exposure to gentrification, sexual identity, and the type of educational institutions a gentrifier attended are of greater influence.
  426. Find this resource:
  427.  
  428. Clay, Phillip L. 1979. Neighborhood renewal: Middle-class resettlement and incumbent upgrading in American neighborhoods. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
  429. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  430. In his 1979 text, Clay outlines the stages in which gentrification occurs, beginning with the in-movement of residents with relatively low economic and high cultural capital, followed later by more affluent members of the gentry. Clay suggests that neighborhood relations and attitudes vary with gentrification stage.
  431. Find this resource:
  432.  
  433. Kerstein, Robert. 1990. Stage models of gentrification. Urban Affairs Quarterly 25.4: 620–639.
  434. DOI: 10.1177/004208169002500406Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  435. Kerstein refines Clay’s stage-model theory of gentrification to better reflect the contours of gentrification in a Tampa, Florida, neighborhood.
  436. Find this resource:
  437.  
  438. Lloyd, Richard. 2005. Neo-Bohemia: Art and commerce in the postindustrial city. New York: Routledge.
  439. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  440. Lloyd’s ethnography documents the crucial role of artists as first-wave gentrifiers of Chicago’s Wicker Park. Lloyd documents neighborhood attributes that attracted artists, as well as how artists help to attract later-stage gentrifiers and investors.
  441. Find this resource:
  442.  
  443. Ocejo, Richard E. 2011. The early gentrifier: Weaving a nostalgia narrative on the Lower East Side. City and Community 10.3: 285–310.
  444. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2011.01372.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  445. Drawing on interviews with and observation of first-wave gentrifiers on the Lower East Side, Ocejo charts “early gentrifiers’” nostalgia for an earlier phase of gentrification and sense of symbolic ownership of the neighborhood.
  446. Find this resource:
  447.  
  448. The Middle Class, Global Elites, and other Economic Actors
  449.  
  450. At one time scholars presented a relatively straightforward portrait of the gentrifier, as middle and upper middle class, typically white, individuals or couples moving back to the central city. In recent decades, the literature has presented an increasingly complex portrait of the “gentrifier,” noting not only variation in terms of race, attitudes, and sexual identity, but also in terms of class. The articles in this section present evidence of distinct “gentries” engaged in gentrification, from documentation of the movement of the super-wealthy to Brooklyn Heights in Lees 2003 (cited under Accounting for Diverse Geographies, Processes, and Actors), to attention to the central role of the “new middle class” in the gentrification of six Canadian cities in Ley 1996. Moreover, McKinnish, et al. 2010 attends to the role of middle-class black gentrifiers, while Smith 2005 outlines the particular role of students, who typically possess limited economic capital, in the gentrification of university neighborhoods, and Rofe 2003 presents the notion of a “global elite” that participates in the gentrification of cities around the world.
  451.  
  452. Ley, David. 1996. The new middle class and the remaking of the central city. London: Oxford Univ. Press.
  453. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  454. Ley argues that, to understand the gentrification of six Canadian cities, one must attend the central role of the “new middle class,” composed of professional and managerial workers. The reorganization of the middle class, he suggests, contributes to the reorganization of the city.
  455. Find this resource:
  456.  
  457. McKinnish, Terra, Randall Walsh, and T. Kirk White. 2010. Who gentrifies low-income neighborhoods? Journal of Urban Economics 67.2: 180–193.
  458. DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2009.08.003Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  459. The article uses confidential 1990 and 2000 Census data to investigate gentrification at the Census-tract level, and reveals the role of middle-class black gentrifiers in the gentrification of predominantly predominantly black neighborhoods.
  460. Find this resource:
  461.  
  462. Rofe, Matthew W. 2003. “I want to be global”: Theorising the gentrifying class as an emergent elite global community. Urban Studies 40.12: 2511–2526.
  463. DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136183Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  464. Rofe argues that the gentrifying class constitutes one global elite community. To preserve their identity in the face of the decreasing symbolic significance of local gentrification, Rofe proposes that in order to preserve its distinction gentrifiers increasingly project their identity onto the global.
  465. Find this resource:
  466.  
  467. Smith, Darren P. 2005. “Studentification”: The gentrification factory. In Gentrification in a global context: The new urban colonialism. Edited by Rowland Atkinson and Gary Bridge, 72–89. London: Routledge.
  468. DOI: 10.4324/9780203392089Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  469. Smith proposes that college and university students concentrated in enclaves in university towns contribute to “studentification,” or gentrification by students.
  470. Find this resource:
  471.  
  472. Gender
  473.  
  474. For several decades scholars have written about the role of gender in gentrification. A key feature of this literature is attention to how changes in gendered work patterns facilitate gentrification (Bondi 1991, Warde 1991). Others seek to uncover how multiple identities, such as gender and class, and the patterning of life course, conspire to influence gender and class practices in gentrifying spaces (Bondi 1999), or examine the gendering of revitalization processes (Kern 2010). A seminal article is Rose 1984, which proposes that some gentrifiers by virtue of their economic position and/or gender are “marginal gentrifiers,” and that their marginal status influences their attitudes toward their neighborhood.
  475.  
  476. Bondi, Liz. 1991. Gender divisions and gentrification: A critique. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 16.2: 190–198.
  477. DOI: 10.2307/622613Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  478. Bondi advocates for an approach to the study of gentrification that acknowledges not only how changes in gendered work patterns facilitate the process, but also how gender, like class, is reworked and reconstituted via gentrification.
  479. Find this resource:
  480.  
  481. Bondi, Liz. 1999. Gender, class, and gentrification: Enriching the debate. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 17.3: 261–282.
  482. DOI: 10.1068/d170261Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  483. Bondi enters the debate about the interrelationships among gender, class, and gentrification by examining their role in the transformation of two central city neighborhoods and a suburban neighborhood in Edinburgh, Scotland. She argues that gender, class, and life course are interwoven in different ways in different neighborhoods.
  484. Find this resource:
  485.  
  486. Kern, Leslie. 2010. Gendering reurbanisation: Women and new-build gentrification in Toronto. Population, Space and Place 16.5: 363–379.
  487. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  488. Kern explores the origins of women’s disproportionate ownership of condominiums amid a massive wave of condominium development in Toronto, Canada. Examining the gendered narratives of condominium developers and owners, the article contributes to understanding of the gendering of “revitalization” and, more generally, of everyday urban life.
  489. Find this resource:
  490.  
  491. Rose, Damaris. 1984. Rethinking gentrification: Beyond the uneven development of Marxist urban theory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 2.1: 47–74.
  492. DOI: 10.1068/d020047Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  493. The article introduces Rose’s concept of the “marginal gentrifier” whose ambiguous economic position influences her/his relation to the changing neighborhood. She notes women’s disproportionate place—particularly those who are unmarried and/or raising children independently—among marginal gentrifiers.
  494. Find this resource:
  495.  
  496. Warde, Alan. 1991. Gentrification as consumption: Issues of class and gender. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 9.2: 223–232.
  497. DOI: 10.1068/d090223Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  498. Warde distinguishes between gentrification driven by property developers and that driven by the collective actions of local households. In the case of the latter type of gentrification, he proposes that engagement in the process originates in women’s new patterns of employment.
  499. Find this resource:
  500.  
  501. Attitudes
  502.  
  503. For decades, scholars presented a relatively homogeneous portrait of gentrifiers’ attitudes. The dominant explanation, embodied in Smith 1996 (cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions), indicated that gentrifiers took pleasure in the transformation of urban space, and sought to remake the space—regardless of gentrification’s cost for longtimers—in their own image. Others documented their drive to preserve historic buildings (Glass 1964, cited under Defining and Identifying Gentrification), or otherwise to bring new life to old spaces (Zukin 1982, cited under Culture and Urban Branding). Some note departures from this archetype that correspond with gentrifiers’ personal attributes, such as their gender and income level (Butler 1997; Rose 1984, the latter cited under Gender), lifestyle (Lloyd 2005, cited under Culture and Urban Branding), race (Taylor 2002, cited under Class and Cultural Conflict; Pattillo 2007, cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions), generation (Caulfield 1994), or duration of residence in the neighborhood (Berry 1985; Lloyd 2005, the latter cited under Culture and Urban Branding). Recently, some have argued that gentrifiers’ attitudes vary by neighborhood (Butler and Robson 2001, Butler and Robson 2003). Still others, such as Brown-Saracino, have recently proposed that gentrifiers’ attitudes and practices are quite diverse and that many gentrifiers articulate orientations to gentrification that depart substantially from the popular image of the ruthless “urban pioneer” (Brown-Saracino 2004; Brown-Saracino 2007; Brown-Saracino 2009, cited under Characteristics by Gentrification Stage; Guimond and Simard 2010).
  504.  
  505. Berry, Brian J. L. 1985. Islands of renewal in seas of decay. In The new urban reality. Edited by Paul E. Peterson, 69–96. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  506. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  507. In the face of population decline, Berry argued, private-market initiatives led to the revitalization of certain city neighborhoods. Within a sea of urban decay, islands of renewal were emerging. Berry documents the role of young adults and white collar professionals in the revitalization of these islands, as well as concomitant gentrification mechanisms. In addition, noting that many reports of gentrifiers’ attributes are anecdotal, Berry analyzes systematically collected data to present a more accurate portrait of the gentrifier.
  508. Find this resource:
  509.  
  510. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2004. Social preservationists and the quest for authentic community. City and Community 3.2: 135–147.
  511. DOI: 10.1111/j.1535-6841.2004.00073.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  512. Drawing on ethnographies of four gentrifying communities, Brown-Saracino finds that half of the gentrifiers she interviewed articulated what she refers to as a social preservation ideology and engaged in a related set of private, symbolic, and political practices, departing starkly from the prototypical “urban pioneer.”
  513. Find this resource:
  514.  
  515. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2007. Virtuous marginality: Social preservationists and the selection of the old-timer. Theory and Society 36.5: 437–468.
  516. DOI: 10.1007/s11186-007-9041-1Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  517. Documents how “social preservationists” fail to regard all longtimers as equally authentic, working to preserve those they believe embody claims to authentic community. Preservationists measure the authenticity of others’ communities against their own “inauthenticity.” That is, they associate authentic community with, and highly value, characteristics they do not share, and out of a desire to preserve the authentic come to regard their distance from it as virtuous.
  518. Find this resource:
  519.  
  520. Butler, Tim. 1997. Gentrification and the middle classes. London: Ashgate.
  521. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  522. Based on interviews with 250 individuals living in London’s Hackney in the 1980s, Gentrification and the Middle Classes documents informants’ reasons for living in the borough and their experiences there. In so doing, it enhances knowledge of how middle-class actors think of themselves and their position in the city and beyond.
  523. Find this resource:
  524.  
  525. Butler, Tim, and Garry Robson. 2001. Social capital, gentrification and neighbourhood change in London: A comparison of three South London neighbourhoods. Urban Studies 38.12: 2145–2162.
  526. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087090Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  527. Based on a study of three south London neighborhoods, the authors argue that gentrifiers differentially deploy social, economic, and cultural capital in the process of participating in gentrification. Such differences in deployment, they conclude, contribute to neighborhood distinction.
  528. Find this resource:
  529.  
  530. Butler, Tim, and Garry Robson. 2003. London calling: The middle classes and the re-making of inner London. Oxford: Berg.
  531. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  532. London Calling presents a vivid portrait of how gentrification has refashioned London neighborhoods to represent middle-class tastes, needs, and ambitions. The book also documents and explores gentrifiers’ attitudes regarding education, family, and social mix, and how and why these vary by neighborhood.
  533. Find this resource:
  534.  
  535. Caulfield, Jon. 1994. City form and everyday life: Toronto’s gentrification and critical social practice. Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press.
  536. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  537. Caulfield documents how critical social practice—most pressingly, concern with the homogeneity of the suburbs and the social implications thereof—draws gentrifiers to the central city. In so doing, he outlines how gentrification is driven by a desire to avoid homogenizing suburbs, and by participation in a form of city-building that risks replicating the conditions middle-class gentrifiers seek to escape.
  538. Find this resource:
  539.  
  540. Guimond, Laurie, and Myriam Simard. 2010. Gentrification and neo-rural populations in the Québec countryside: Representations of various actors. Journal of Rural Studies 26.4: 449–464.
  541. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.06.002Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  542. Drawing on interviews with four distinct classes of actors in the Quebec countryside, the authors report on those actors’ representations of gentrifiers. They argue that informant-produced representations present a more revealing portrait of gentrifiers than scholars typically provide.
  543. Find this resource:
  544.  
  545. Sexual and Racial Minorities
  546.  
  547. In the last decade, a spate of scholarship has emerged documenting the diversity of gentrifiers’ characteristics, with particular attention to their racial and sexual identity characteristics. For instance, Taylor 2002 (cited under Class and Cultural Conflict), Pattillo 2007 (cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions), Boyd 2008, and Hyra 2008 examine African American gentrifiers’ role in Chicago and New York neighborhoods, while Brown-Saracino 2009, Sibalis 2004, Smith and Holt 2005, Giraud 2012, and Rothenberg 1995 attend to the role of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations. Importantly, much of this work seeks to document how gentrifiers’ identities inform their participation in gentrification. For instance, Taylor 2002 (cited under Class and Cultural Conflict) and Rothenberg 1995 demonstrate respectively how racism and homophobia influence gentrifiers’ residential choices.
  548.  
  549. Boyd, Michelle R. 2008. Jim Crow nostalgia: Reconstructing race in Bronzeville. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press.
  550. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  551. Drawing on ethnographic and historical data, Boyd demonstrates how in an effort to revitalize Chicago’s historically African American Bronzeville, local politicians, community leaders, and investors evoked nostalgia for the neighborhood’s Jim Crow past. Boyd argues that such actors instrumentally deployed such nostalgia to recast the neighborhood as a desirable site for reinvestment.
  552. Find this resource:
  553.  
  554. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2009. A neighborhood that never changes: Gentrification, social preservation and the search for authenticity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  555. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  556. Brown-Saracino’s book draws on ethnographies of four gentrifying communities, two of which possess high proportions of LGBT residents. The book attends to how sexual minority status informs gentrifiers’ orientations to gentrification, as well as how a publicly visible LGBT population influences newcomer/old-timer interactions and dynamics.
  557. Find this resource:
  558.  
  559. Giraud, Colin. 2012. Gay populations as gentrifiers in Paris and Montreal. Metro Politics (22 February).
  560. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  561. In this short essay, Giraud compares and contrasts the role and timing of gay migration and gentrification in two neighborhoods: Paris’s Marais and Montreal’s Village. Giraud argues that the Marais gentrified before it became a gay enclave, and that the Village has a high proportion of gay men, but that it is not fully gentrified.
  562. Find this resource:
  563.  
  564. Hyra, Derek S. 2008. The new urban renewal: The economic transformation of Harlem and Bronzeville. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  565. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  566. The New Urban Renewal documents the gentrification of historically African American Bronzeville (Chicago) and Harlem (New York). Hyra documents how federal and local policies benefit middle-class African American gentrifiers and are of great cost for their low-income and working-class counterparts.
  567. Find this resource:
  568.  
  569. Rothenberg, Tamar. 1995. “And she told two friends . . .”: Lesbians creating urban social space. In Mapping desire: Geographies of sexuality. Edited by David Bell and Gill Valentine, 165–181. London: Routledge.
  570. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  571. Rothenberg details the movement of lesbians into Brooklyn’s Park Slope—a movement driven largely by social networks—gesturing to their possible role in the neighborhood’s gentrification.
  572. Find this resource:
  573.  
  574. Sibalis, Michael. 2004. Urban space and homosexuality: The example of the Marais, Paris’ “Gay Ghetto.” Urban Studies 41.9: 1739–1750.
  575. DOI: 10.1080/0042098042000243138Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  576. Sibalis details the history of Paris’s Marais, illustrating the conditions that enabled the establishment of a “gay ghetto” in the neighborhood, as well as the role of gay business owners in the subsequent and continuing gentrification of the Marais, which has become an internationally recognized gay tourist destination.
  577. Find this resource:
  578.  
  579. Smith, Darren P., and Louise Holt. 2005. “Lesbian migrants in the gentrified valley” and “other” geographies of rural gentrification. Journal of Rural Studies 21.3: 313–322.
  580. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.04.002Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  581. Based on a qualitative study of Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, Smith and Holt uncover the role of lesbian households in the town’s gentrification, and call for further acknowledgment of lesbians’ role in rural gentrification.
  582. Find this resource:
  583.  
  584. The Arts and Artists
  585.  
  586. For decades scholars have traced the role of artists in gentrification. On the one hand, this scholarship often explores artists’ role as first-wave gentrifiers, and their experiences in gentrification’s early stages (Ley 2003, Lloyd 2004, Shaw and Sullivan 2011, Zukin 1982). On the other hand, much of this research also investigates how artists serve as symbols that invite further investment in the neighborhood.
  587.  
  588. Ley, David. 2003. Artists, aestheticization and the field of gentrification. Urban Studies 40.12: 2527–2544.
  589. DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000136192Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  590. Relying on data from Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, Ley outlines the role of artists and the process of aestheticization in gentrification. Drawing on Bourdieu, Ley documents how artists’ habitus serves to attract other gentrifiers and capital investments in gentrifying neighborhoods.
  591. Find this resource:
  592.  
  593. Lloyd, Richard. 2004. The neighborhood in cultural production: Material and symbolic resources in the New Bohemia. City & Community 3.4: 343–372.
  594. DOI: 10.1111/j.1535-6841.2004.00092.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  595. Lloyd demonstrates how neighborhood spaces influence the residential choices and activities of young artists. Specifically, he outlines the symbolic and material resources Wicker Park provides for artists.
  596. Find this resource:
  597.  
  598. Shaw, Samuel C., and Daniel Monroe Sullivan. 2011. White night: Gentrification, racial exclusion, and perceptions and participation in the arts. City and Community 10.2: 241–264.
  599. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2011.01373.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  600. Drawing on the case of monthly art walks in a gentrifying Portland, Oregon, district, the authors present data indicating how such events contribute to racial exclusions.
  601. Find this resource:
  602.  
  603. Zukin, Sharon. 1982. Loft living: Culture and capital in urban change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
  604. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  605. Zukin notes how artists helped to legitimate the transformation of industrial space into residences and artist workspaces, and thus to legitimate gentrification.
  606. Find this resource:
  607.  
  608. Explanations for Participation
  609.  
  610. Although many texts on gentrification offer accounts for why gentrifiers participate in gentrification, some devote particular focus to this topic, either by taking it as their primary subject, or by posing questions about how gentrifiers understand and articulate the reasons for their engagement. This body of work reveals a diversity of rationales as well as a few notable patterns. Some gentrifiers move in search of workspace (Zukin 1982) or a community of artists (Lloyd 2005, cited under Culture and Urban Branding). Other authors demonstrate how distaste for the suburbs (Glass 1964), women’s labor force participation (Markusen 1981), appreciation for “diversity” (Allen 1980), taste for “authenticity” and “progress” (Hines 2010), or even a desire to live in ungentrified space (Brown-Saracino 2009) influence gentrifiers’ choices. Taken together, scholarship on explanations for gentrifiers’ participation suggests that, on gentrifers’ accounts, both economic and cultural factors, including their tastes and identities, influence their engagement in neighborhood transformation.
  611.  
  612. Allen, Irving. 1980. The ideology of dense neighborhood redevelopment: Cultural diversity and transcendent community experience. Urban Affairs Review 15.4: 409–428.
  613. DOI: 10.1177/107808748001500404Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  614. Allen examines parallels between the utopian quest for the suburbs of a previous generation and that of urban gentrifiers. He finds that urban gentrifiers, like their suburban forbears, are motivated by ideology. They seek cultural diversity and pluralism in their new, urban neighborhoods. However, Allen cautions that the quest is romantic and rarely produces the alternative community that some gentrifiers seek.
  615. Find this resource:
  616.  
  617. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2009. A neighborhood that never changes: Gentrification, social preservation and the search for authenticity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  618. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  619. Drawing on ethnographies of four gentrifying communities Brown-Saracino presents a portrait of gentrifiers who relocate to live alongside “old-timers” and their “authentic” communities and subsequently engage in political, private, and symbolic practices to prevent or minimize their displacement.
  620. Find this resource:
  621.  
  622. Glass, Ruth. 1964. London: Aspects of change. London: Centre for Urban Studies.
  623. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  624. The introduction notes the central role of middle-class individuals seeking an “escape” from the suburbs, a reduced commute to work, urban amenities, and historic properties.
  625. Find this resource:
  626.  
  627. Hines, J. Dwight. 2010. In pursuit of experience: The postindustrial gentrification of the rural American West. Ethnography 11.2: 285–308.
  628. DOI: 10.1177/1466138110361846Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  629. Drawing on ethnographic research in south-central Montana, Hines argues that there are more parallels than differences between urban and rural gentrification. He finds that rural gentrifiers relocate in search of “authenticity” and “progress” and to distinguish themselves as members of the postindustrial middle class.
  630. Find this resource:
  631.  
  632. Markusen, Ann. 1981. City spatial structure, women’s household work, and national urban policy. In Women and the American city. Edited by Catharine R. Stimpson, Elsa Dixler, Martha J. Nelson, and Kathryn B. Yatrakis, 20–41. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  633. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  634. Markusen outlines how women’s increasing participation in the labor force and the breakdown of the patriarchal household encouraged engagement in gentrification. Residence in the central city, Markusen argues, enabled a more equal distribution of household labor.
  635. Find this resource:
  636.  
  637. Zukin, Sharon. 1982. Loft living: Culture and capital in urban change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
  638. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  639. Zukin’s landmark book charts the transformation of loft spaces in New York into artists’ work and living space. Loft Living demonstrates how artists’ need for living space/work space, as well as their taste for the loft aesthetic, encouraged the transformation of Manhattan’s industrial past. However, Zukin carefully documents how government policies and real estate interests aided and abetted the transformation process in which artists engaged.
  640. Find this resource:
  641.  
  642. Outcomes and Consequences
  643.  
  644. For nearly four decades, gentrification scholarship has sought to identify, measure, and evaluate gentrification’s outcomes and consequences (see Vigdor 2002). Areas of concern and levels of analysis vary, from studies attentive to what gentrification does for or to the cities in which it takes place to those that study its consequences for children in a specific gentrifying neighborhood. As Atkinson 2003 (cited under Interventions) characterizes the literature, some regard gentrification as a “savior” that brings economic resources to fiscally neglected neighborhoods or cities (e.g., Vigdor 2010), while others regard it instead as “vengeful wrecker” of long-standing communities and their space and traditions. Others propose that gentrification might improve housing stock and infrastructure even as it displaces some residents, or question altogether the centrality of displacement to gentrification processes (e.g., Freeman 2006, cited under Physical Displacement). In the last decade, several scholars have provided thorough overviews of these areas of debate and disagreement, offering their own conclusions about the evidence and literature (Atkinson 2004, Atkinson 2003), or even documenting how these debates are articulated in popular media (Brown-Saracino and Rumpf 2011). Although many articles and books on gentrification address overlapping facets of gentrification’s outcomes and consequences, highlighted below are their primary contributions to understanding of gentrification’s outcomes, such as its consequences for community, local economies, daily life, education, cross-class interactions, public space, crime, and health. Much of the literature on gentrification’s outcomes attends to the displacement—physical and, secondarily, social, political, and cultural—of longtime residents. Among other themes, the literature addresses the proportion of residents displaced, the consequences of displacement, and populations most at risk of displacement.
  645.  
  646. Atkinson, Rowland. 2004. The evidence on the impact of gentrification: New lessons for the urban renaissance? European Journal of Housing Policy 4.1: 107–131.
  647. DOI: 10.1080/1461671042000215479Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  648. Atkinson provides a review of English-language scholarship on gentrification, analyzing its conclusions about gentrification’s outcomes and consequences. He argues that the literature suggests that gentrification is, on the whole, harmful, producing displacement and conflict.
  649. Find this resource:
  650.  
  651. Brown-Saracino, Japonica, and Cesraea Rumpf. 2011. Diverse imageries of gentrification: Evidence from newspaper coverage in major U.S. cities, 1986–2006. Journal of Urban Affairs 33.3: 289–315.
  652. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.2011.00552.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  653. The authors analyze articles on gentrification published over two decades in nine US newspapers. Their analysis suggests that newspaper frames of gentrification range from those wholly supportive of gentrification to those strictly critical, and that papers frequently publish accounts that reference gentrification’s perceived “costs” and “benefits.” Moreover, coverage changes over time and frames vary in relation to depictions of place characteristics, gentrifiers, and longtimers.
  654. Find this resource:
  655.  
  656. Vigdor, Jacob L. 2002. Does gentrification harm the poor? Brookings–Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs: 134–173.
  657. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  658. Using Boston as a case, this paper outlines the difficulties associated with seeking to answer the question the title poses: “Does gentrification harm the poor?” Vigdor suggests that to answer this question scholars must first isolate the underlying cause of gentrification, whether revitalization increases the amount poor households are willing to pay for housing, and whether revitalization increases housing costs beyond what poor households are willing to pay.
  659. Find this resource:
  660.  
  661. Vigdor, Jacob L. 2010. Is urban decay bad? Is urban revitalization bad too? Journal of Urban Economics 68.3: 277–289.
  662. DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2010.05.003Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  663. Vigdor uses American Housing Survey data to analyze the costs of neighborhood revitalization and decay for households, concluding that, measured in terms of rent changes, for the majority of the population neighborhood decline is detrimental and neighborhood revitalization is beneficial.
  664. Find this resource:
  665.  
  666. Implications for Community
  667.  
  668. Studies of gentrification’s outcomes often emphasize how gentrification, through physical and social displacement, contributes to the disruption of longtimers’ communities (Betancur 2011, Deener 2007). Others note how gentrification encourages the formation of distinct, class-based communities within common physical space (Chidester and Gadsby 2009), how and why the degree to which old-timers articulate a sense of community loss varies by context, and why some gentrifiers find that gentrification weakens their own place-based ties (Brown-Saracino 2009). Although specific questions and findings vary, a concern with gentrification’s nonmaterial consequences—a set of consequences that nonetheless often emerge from gentrification’s material attributes—characterizes this line of inquiry.
  669.  
  670. Betancur, John. 2011. Gentrification and community fabric in Chicago. Urban Studies 48.2: 383–406.
  671. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009360680Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  672. Betancur explores the implications of gentrification for longtime residents in five Chicago neighborhoods with particular attention to its consequences for social support and advancement. Betancur argues that such resources are of particular import for poor and low-income residents.
  673. Find this resource:
  674.  
  675. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2009. A neighborhood that never changes: Gentrification, social preservation, and the search for authenticity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  676. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  677. Brown-Saracino’s book explores longtime residents’ reactions to the threat gentrification poses to their networks and ties, and the efforts of some gentrifiers, whom she terms “social preservationists,” to remain on the margins of the communities they venerate in order to maintain their “authenticity.”
  678. Find this resource:
  679.  
  680. Chidester, Robert C., and David A. Gadsby. 2009. One neighborhood, two communities: The public archaeology of class in a gentrifying urban neighborhood. International Labor and Working-Class History 76.1: 127–146.
  681. DOI: 10.1017/S0147547909990123Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  682. The authors argue that the gentrification of a former textile mill neighborhood in Baltimore, Maryland, has led to the creation of two distinct communities: one composed of working-class longtimers, and the other composed of upper-middle-class newcomers.
  683. Find this resource:
  684.  
  685. Deener, Andrew. 2007. Commerce as the structure and symbol of neighborhood life: Reshaping the meaning of community in Venice, California. City and Community 6.4: 291–314.
  686. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2007.00229.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  687. Deener demonstrates the role of symbolic boundaries in the constitution of community, as well as how gentrification influences longtime residents’ access to public spaces central to community life.
  688. Find this resource:
  689.  
  690. Education and Children
  691.  
  692. How do schools or specific types of educational institutions, such as charter schools, enable gentrification or at least inform the type of gentrifier who engages in the gentrification of a specific neighborhood (Hankins 2007)? How do gentrifiers influence public schools in their neighborhoods (DeSena and Ansalone 2009, Hankins 2007), and how do they navigate their children’s education in what they often regard as spaces with limited educational resources (Butler and Robson 2003; DeSena and Ansalone 2009; Formoso, et al. 2010)? These are among the questions that gentrification scholars pose about schools and educational processes. This line of inquiry has expanded in recent years as scholars have increasingly documented the experiences of “nontraditional” gentrifiers—that is, those who challenge the notion of the monolithic childless gentrifier (Hankins 2007).
  693.  
  694. Butler, Tim, and Robson, Garry. 2003. Plotting the middle classes: Gentrification and circuits of education in London. Housing Studies 18.1: 5–28.
  695. DOI: 10.1080/0267303032000076812Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  696. Butler and Robson argue, drawing on research on five gentrifying London neighborhoods, that there are multiple educational strategies that parents living in gentrifying areas pursue for their children. Economics, culture, and neighborhood educational context work together to inform educational choices, and those choices in turn inform their “metropolitan habitus.”
  697. Find this resource:
  698.  
  699. DeSena, Judith N., and George Ansalone. 2009. Gentrification, schooling and social inequality. Educational Research Quarterly 33.1: 61–76.
  700. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  701. Relying on interviews, the authors investigate the role of gentrification in school tracking, documenting how affluent newcomers to Brooklyn’s Greenpoint-Williamsburg neighborhood rely on schools outside of their neighborhood and in so doing contribute to “between-school tracking.”
  702. Find this resource:
  703.  
  704. Formoso, Diana, Rachel N. Weber, and Marc S. Atkins. 2010. Gentrification and urban children’s well-being: Tipping the scales from problems to promise. American Journal of Community Psychology 46.3–4: 395–412.
  705. DOI: 10.1007/s10464-010-9348-3Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  706. The authors explore the relation among gentrification, institutional resources, collective socialization, and family processes related to child development.
  707. Find this resource:
  708.  
  709. Hankins, Katherine B. 2007. The final frontier: Charter schools as new community institutions of gentrification. Urban Geography 28.2: 113–128.
  710. DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.28.2.113Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  711. Hankins investigates the role of middle-class gentrifiers with children in an Atlanta neighborhood. She finds that the existence of charter schools permits gentrifiers with children to take control over a public institution, and therefore encourages gentrification by “nontraditional gentrifiers”—that is, those with children.
  712. Find this resource:
  713.  
  714. Physical Displacement
  715.  
  716. Gentrification scholars have long attended to displacement, and have sought to track the degree to which gentrification produces displacement (Gale 1979), which populations, businesses, and organizations are most at risk of displacement in the gentrification context (DeVerteuil 2011; Henig 1981; Lee and Hodge 1984; Perez 2004, the latter cited under Social and Cultural Displacement), how precisely gentrification produces displacement (Marcuse 1986; Pattillo 2007, cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions; Perez 2004, cited under Social and Cultural Displacement), and methods for alleviating or minimizing displacement (Hyra 2008). More recently, some have debated how best to evaluate displacement rates (Atkinson 2000; see also Vigdor 2002, cited under Outcomes and Consequences), and whether gentrification-driven displacement is as widespread as scholars long believed it to be (Freeman and Braconi 2004; Freeman 2006; Sumka 1979; Vigdor 2010, cited under Outcomes and Consequences). Regardless of how scholars answer these questions, displacement remains a central focus of gentrification inquiry.
  717.  
  718. Atkinson, Rowland. 2000. Measuring gentrification and displacement in Greater London. Urban Studies 37.1: 149–165.
  719. DOI: 10.1080/0042098002339Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  720. Summarizing challenges with measuring displacement, Atkinson seeks to overcome such difficulties by combining cross-sectional census data with spatially reaggregated longitudinal census data. Atkinson concludes that displacement clusters around gentrified areas, and that displacement is prevalent for certain groups.
  721. Find this resource:
  722.  
  723. DeVerteuil, Geoffrey. 2011. Evidence of gentrification-induced displacement among social services in London and Los Angeles. Urban Studies 48.8: 1563–1580.
  724. DOI: 10.1177/0042098010379277Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  725. The author tracks the displacement of social service agencies over a decade in gentrifying Los Angeles and London. The author concludes that “entrapment”—or the inability of social service agencies to relocate to alternate affordable space—is even more widespread than displacement.
  726. Find this resource:
  727.  
  728. Freeman, Lance. 2006. There goes the ’hood: Views of gentrification from the ground up. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press.
  729. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  730. Freeman relies on interviews with African American residents of New York’s Harlem and Brooklyn’s Clinton Hill to reveal the differential impact of gentrification on residents, presenting a nuanced portrait of residents’ experience of gentrification.
  731. Find this resource:
  732.  
  733. Freeman, Lance, and Frank Braconi. 2004. Gentrification and displacement: New York City in the 1990s. Journal of the American Planning Association 70.1: 39–52.
  734. DOI: 10.1080/01944360408976337Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  735. This article seeks to fill what the authors define as a void in knowledge of gentrification’s influence on displacement rates. Using New York in the 1990s as a case, they conclude that gentrification was associated with slow residential turnover and that normal succession rather than gentrification-induced displacement drives changes in gentrifying New York neighborhoods.
  736. Find this resource:
  737.  
  738. Gale, Dennis E. 1979. Middle class resettlement in older urban neighborhoods: The evidence and the implications. Journal of the American Planning Association 45.3: 293–304.
  739. DOI: 10.1080/01944367908976968Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  740. Gale presents displacement as an unambiguous consequence of gentrification. However, he encourages scholars and practitioners to weigh this consequence against the benefits gentrification may bring to local economies and housing stock.
  741. Find this resource:
  742.  
  743. Henig, Jeffrey R. 1981. Gentrification and displacement of the elderly: An empirical analysis. The Gerontologist 21.1: 67–75.
  744. DOI: 10.1093/geront/21.1.67Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  745. Henig relies on Census data from nine US cities to document the impact of gentrification on elderly residents.
  746. Find this resource:
  747.  
  748. Hyra, Derek S. 2008. The new urban renewal: The economic transformation of Harlem and Bronzeville. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  749. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  750. The New Urban Renewal documents the simultaneous gentrification of two historically African American neighborhoods—Chicago’s Bronzeville and New York’s Harlem—revealing the role of federal and local policies in spurring gentrification and in determining its influence on longtime residents. Among his findings is evidence that city housing policies, particularly with regard to public housing, greatly influence the degree to which longtime residents are able to withstand gentrification.
  751. Find this resource:
  752.  
  753. Lee, Barrett A., and David C. Hodge. 1984. “Social differentials in metropolitan residential displacement.” In Gentrification, displacement and neighborhood revitalization. Edited by J. John Palen and Bruce London, 140–169. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.
  754. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  755. The authors rely on 1970s data from the Annual Housing Survey to review displacement rates and to identify impacted populations. They find that displacement is unevenly distributed across urban populations, posing a particular challenge to the elderly and low-income. Furthermore, central city areas with high proportions of black residents experience disproportionately high levels of displacement.
  756. Find this resource:
  757.  
  758. Marcuse, Peter. 1986. Abandonment, gentrification and displacement: The linkages in New York City. In Gentrification of the city. Edited by Neil Smith and Peter Williams, 153–177. London: Unwin Hyman.
  759. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  760. Marcuse argues that two seemingly opposed processes—the abandonment of central city properties and the displacement of residents from the central city—are actually linked. Each derives from economic changes influencing urban contexts, and each process—abandonment and gentrification—leads to the displacement of the poor.
  761. Find this resource:
  762.  
  763. Sumka, Howard J. 1979. Neighborhood revitalization and displacement: A review of the evidence. Journal of the American Planning Association 45.4: 480–487.
  764. DOI: 10.1080/01944367908976994Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  765. The author argues that although displacement may be endemic in some neighborhoods, in broader terms he finds little evidence that a large segment of the urban poor face displacement.
  766. Find this resource:
  767.  
  768. Social and Cultural Displacement
  769.  
  770. Inaugurated by Michael Chernoff’s 1980 article on “social displacement” in Atlanta, a subset of gentrification scholars have inquired into how gentrification produces not only physical displacement, but also social and cultural displacement. That is, they attend to how gentrification reduces longtimers’ influence and authority in local politics (Chernoff 1980) and organizations (Martin 2007). Relatedly, others attend to gentrification’s consequences for neighborhood norms, noting how changes in norms can produce for longtimers the sense that a neighborhood is no longer one’s “home” (Pattillo 2007, Perez 2004).
  771.  
  772. Chernoff, Michael. 1980. “Social displacement in a renovating neighborhood’s commercial district: Atlanta.” In Back to the city: Issues in neighborhood renovation. Edited by Shirley Bradway Laska and Daphne Spain, 204–219. New York: Pergamon.
  773. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  774. Chernoff argues that in the face of gentrification longtime residents not only face physical displacement, but also what he terms “social displacement”: the loss of influence and authority.
  775. Find this resource:
  776.  
  777. Martin, Leslie. 2007. Fighting for control: Political displacement in Atlanta’s gentrifying neighborhoods. Urban Affairs Review 42.5: 603–628.
  778. DOI: 10.1177/1078087406296604Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  779. Martin examines longtimers’ loss of political influence in four gentrifying Atlanta neighborhoods. She explores why neighborhood organizations in three neighborhoods resisted this displacement, while those in another did not, pointing to the debilitating effects of interorganizational conflict.
  780. Find this resource:
  781.  
  782. Pattillo, Mary. 2007. Black on the block: The politics of race and class in the city. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  783. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  784. The book details how gentrifiers and longtimers battle over material and symbolic resources.
  785. Find this resource:
  786.  
  787. Perez, Gina M. 2004. The near Northwest Side story: Migration, displacement, and Puerto Rican families. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
  788. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  789. Perez documents the movement of Puerto Rican immigrants between Chicago and Puerto Rico, as well as within the city of Chicago. She argues that one cause of this migration, particularly of intrametropolitan migration, is gentrification. In addition to physical displacement, she reveals the social, cultural, and political displacement that Puerto Rican youth in Chicago’s Humboldt Park face with advancing gentrification, as well as resistance strategies that they and community organizations rely on.
  790. Find this resource:
  791.  
  792. Diversity or Social Mix
  793.  
  794. Scholars ask a number of questions regarding diversity and social mix in the gentrification context. Some inquire into neighborhoods’ ability to remain “diverse” or “mixed” as gentrification advances (Freeman 2009). Others note gentrifiers’ and other actors’ reliance on a rhetoric of appreciation for “diversity” (Berrey 2005). Most such scholarship attends to the mismatch between gentrifiers’ stated appreciation for diversity and their work to encourage or advance gentrification (Lees 2008, Rose 2004) and criticizes urban policy that approaches gentrification as a strategy for increasing “social mix” (Lees 2008).
  795.  
  796. Berrey, Ellen C. 2005. Divided over diversity: Political discourse in a Chicago neighborhood. City and Community 4.2: 143–170.
  797. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2005.00109.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  798. Drawing on a micro-level analysis of neighborhood discourse, Berrey reveals how, in the context of a demographically diverse gentrifying Chicago neighborhood, three different groups of actors use talk of “diversity” to pursue very different aims—from resistance to gentrification to promotion thereof.
  799. Find this resource:
  800.  
  801. Freeman, Lance. 2009. Neighbourhood diversity, metropolitan segregation and gentrification: What are the links in the US? Urban Studies 46.10: 2079–2101.
  802. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009339426Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  803. The author explores the influence of gentrification on diversity, as well as on race and class segregation. He concludes that gentrification does not decrease diversity levels, and, more tenuously, that gentrification reduces class segregation and increases racial segregation.
  804. Find this resource:
  805.  
  806. Lees, Loretta. 2008. Gentrification and social mixing: Towards an inclusive urban renaissance? Urban Studies 45.12 (November): 2449–2470.
  807. DOI: 10.1177/0042098008097099Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  808. Lees notes that some advocate for gentrification as a method for increasing opportunities for distinct urban populations to share space. Despite such policies and what she describes as the new middle-class taste for diversity, she finds that gentrifiers tend to self-aggregate and ultimately that gentrification enables the retaking of the central city for the middle class.
  809. Find this resource:
  810.  
  811. Rose, Damaris. 2004. Discourses and experiences of social mix in gentrifying neighbourhoods: A Montreal case study. Canadian Journal of Urban Research 13:278–316.
  812. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  813. Drawing on interview data, Rose charts gentrifiers’ expressions of appreciation for “social mix” in gentrifying Montreal. Rose cautions that such appreciation rarely influences gentrifiers’ practices or behavior.
  814. Find this resource:
  815.  
  816. Crime
  817.  
  818. Gentrification scholars often inquire into the relation between gentrification and crime. Does gentrification increase or reduce crime rates (Lee 2010, McDonald 1986)? Does it reduce or increase specific types of crime (McDonald 1986)? To what degree do the answers to the above questions vary by gentrifying neighborhood (Papachristos, et al. 2011)? In addition, some consider how and why cities seek to control crime as a method for encouraging gentrification, and, likewise, regard gentrification as a method for controlling crime (Swanson 2007).
  819.  
  820. Lee, Yan Y. 2010. Gentrification and crime: Identification using the 1994 Northridge Earthquake in Los Angeles. Journal of Urban Affairs 32.5: 549–577.
  821. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.2010.00506.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  822. Seeking to control for endogenous variables, Lee examines crime rates in a gentrifying Los Angeles neighborhood after the 1994 Northridge earthquake, concluding that, in the short term, gentrification increases assaults, robberies, automobile thefts, and thefts from automobiles.
  823. Find this resource:
  824.  
  825. McDonald, Scott C. 1986. Does gentrification affect crime rates? In Communities and crime. Edited by Albert J. Reiss and Michael H. Tonry. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  826. DOI: 10.1086/449118Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  827. Drawing on data from fourteen gentrified neighborhoods in Boston, New York, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C., the author argues that gentrification leads to decreases in personal crimes, but has no significant effect on property crime rates.
  828. Find this resource:
  829.  
  830. Papachristos, Andrew J., Chris M. Smith, Mary L. Scherer, and Melissa A. Fugiero. 2011. More coffee, less crime? The relationship between gentrification and neighborhood crime rates in Chicago, 1991 to 2005. City and Community 10.3: 215–240.
  831. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2011.01371.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  832. Examining the relationship among coffee shops, demographic indicators of gentrification, and crime rates, the authors conclude that gentrification varies with the racial characteristics of the gentrifying neighborhood. Specifically, growth in the number of coffee shops in a neighborhood is associated with declining homicide rates for white, Hispanic, and black neighborhoods, but the same increase is associated with increasing street robberies in black gentrifying neighborhoods.
  833. Find this resource:
  834.  
  835. Swanson, Kate. 2007. Revanchist urbanism heads south: The regulation of indigenous beggars and street vendors in Ecuador. Antipode 39.4: 708–728.
  836. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8330.2007.00548.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  837. Swanson argues, following Smith 1996 (cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions), that a “revanchist” ideology has taken hold in Ecuador, and, as a result, that cities rely on the criminalization of beggars and street vendors in order to advance gentrification and otherwise “retake” the city.
  838. Find this resource:
  839.  
  840. Class and Cultural Conflict
  841.  
  842. Ethnographers and others have long sought to document the experience of gentrification, on the ground, for longtime and new residents in gentrifying neighborhoods. Most such accounts reveal conflict—from overt, violent confrontation (Brown-Saracino 2009, Levy and Cybriwsky 1980), to more subtle tensions—that color everyday life in changing space for new and longtime residents alike. Scholars find that the nature and content of conflict depends on gentrification stage and other contextual attributes (Brown-Saracino 2009), such as class, cultural, racial, and ethnic differences between gentrifiers and longtime residents (Anderson 1990; Pattillo 2007, cited under Growth Machines and Other Coalitions; Perez 2004, cited under Social and Cultural Displacement; Taylor 2002), and that it emerges from battles over resources that residents articulate in terms of cultural difference (Spain 1993).
  843.  
  844. Anderson, Elijah. 1990. Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban community. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  845. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  846. Drawing on rich ethnographic data, Anderson presents a portrait of life in a historically African American and poor neighborhood. Specifically, he examines the everyday lives and interactions of residents as white residents move to the neighborhood.
  847. Find this resource:
  848.  
  849. Brown-Saracino, Japonica. 2009. A neighborhood that never changes: Gentrification, social preservation, and the search for authenticity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
  850. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  851. Brown-Saracino attends to conflicts that arise between gentrifiers and longtime residents in four distinct communities: two Chicago neighborhoods and two small New England towns. She reveals instance of longtimers’ violent resistance to changing community demographics and culture, as well as surprising alliances that form between some longtime residents and gentrifiers. Finally, the book provides an account for why the character and degree of cultural conflict varies by gentrifying context.
  852. Find this resource:
  853.  
  854. Levy, Paul R., and Roman A. Cybriwsky. 1980. The hidden dimensions of culture and class: Philadelphia. In Back to the city: Issues in neighborhood renovation. Edited by Shirley Bradway Laska and Daphne Spain, 138–139 and 143–153. New York: Pergamon.
  855. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  856. Drawing on fieldwork in Philadelphia, Levy and Cybriwsky reveal the tension and conflict, including acts of violence, that accompany at least the early stages of gentrification as new and longtime residents battle for neighborhood control.
  857. Find this resource:
  858.  
  859. Spain, Daphne. 1993. Been-heres versus come-heres: Negotiating conflicting community identities. Journal of the American Planning Association 59.2: 156–171.
  860. DOI: 10.1080/01944369308975865Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  861. Spain charts parallels between conflicts that emerge between new and longtime residents in gentrifying urban and rural areas, noting that contests over resources are often couched in language about competing values.
  862. Find this resource:
  863.  
  864. Taylor, Monique M. 2002. Harlem: Between heaven and hell. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press.
  865. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  866. Taylor documents the return of middle-class African Americans to Harlem—a move that a desire to escape discrimination in other parts of the city often motivates. Drawing on interviews and observation, Taylor explores these gentrifiers’ ambitions for the neighborhood and attitudes toward longtime residents over presentation of self, and the use of public space.
  867. Find this resource:
  868.  
  869. Middle-Class Reinvestment
  870.  
  871. Much of the gentrification scholarship considers the question of how the middle-class reinvestment that is a key facet of most gentrification processes influences the cities in which gentrification occurs. However, a few scholars (Byrne 2003, Florida 2002) explicitly advocate for this reinvestment, and outline methods for encouraging it. Florida 2002 advocates that the health and vitality of many cities depends on their ability to attract creative industries, and, in turn, to attract and retain the creative professionals such industries employ. Florida outlines steps cities can take to attract the “creative class.”
  872.  
  873. Byrne, J. Peter. 2003. Two cheers for gentrification. Howard Law Journal 46:405–432.
  874. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  875. Byrne proposes that gentrification benefits cities by attracting middle- and upper-income residents to the central city. Furthermore, he contends that it also benefits poor and working-class residents, and that its negative consequences for such populations would largely be assuaged if the government increased the availability of public housing.
  876. Find this resource:
  877.  
  878. Florida, Richard. 2002. The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
  879. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  880. Florida argues that contemporary urban economies increasingly depend on creative industries powered by creative professionals. These professionals, he argues, are attracted to cities that possess talent, technology, diversity, and amenities, such as bike paths or park systems. Florida outlines the characteristics of the creative class, their transformative potential for struggling cities, and methods cities can rely on to attract them.
  881. Find this resource:
  882.  
  883. Symbolic Conflict and Resistance
  884.  
  885. Although much of the gentrification literature attends to the material consequences of the process for longtime residents, a subset identifies how longtimers and others fight back. That is, it explores the symbolic conflict and resistance that characterizes life on the ground in many gentrifying contexts. Much of this work documents conflict between a diverse set of neighborhood residents engaged in struggles for symbolic ownership of changing space (Abu-Lughod 1995, Kasinitz 1988, Mele 2000), while others focus specifically on methods longtime residents utilize to resist displacement or maintain political control (Martinez 2010; Newman and Wyly 2006; Perez 2004, cited under Social and Cultural Displacement). Others attend to the resistance strategies of organizations (Cimino 2011), to violent conflict and resistance that sometimes emerges, as well as to some gentrifiers’ resistance to certain newcomers or establishments (Lloyd 2005, cited under Culture and Urban Branding; Ocejo 2011; Solnit and Schwartzenberg 2001), as well as to gentrification (Brown-Saracino 2009, cited under Explanations for Participation). Collectively, the scholarship classifies and seeks to explain the origins and form of symbolic conflict and resistance strategies.
  886.  
  887. Abu-Lughod, Janet. 1995. From urban village to East Village: The battle for New York’s Lower East Side. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
  888. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  889. This landmark book demonstrates how a diverse array of residents and officials—activists, hippies, immigrants, squatters, developers, yuppies, drug dealers, the homeless, artists, the police, musicians, and politicians—struggle to share space in New York’s transforming East Village.
  890. Find this resource:
  891.  
  892. Cimino, Richard. 2011. Neighborhoods, niches, and networks: The religious ecology of gentrification. City and Community 10.2: 157–181.
  893. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2011.01361.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  894. Cimino examines the niches that religious organizations fill in the gentrifying Brooklyn neighborhoods of Greenpoint and Williamsburg. He finds that, rather than merely facing displacement, congregations seek to adapt and control their position during gentrification. However, the particular niche that they occupy in a gentrifying neighborhood depends on their repertoires of theology, organizational history, and access to networks and resources.
  895. Find this resource:
  896.  
  897. Kasinitz, Philip. 1988. The gentrification of “Boerum Hill.” Qualitative Sociology 11.3: 163–182.
  898. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  899. Drawing on an ethnography of the Boerum Hill neighborhood, Kasinitz demonstrates how new and longtime residents engaged in symbolic contest over the neighborhood, with each working to define it and its boundaries in opposing terms.
  900. Find this resource:
  901.  
  902. Martinez, Miranda J. 2010. Power at the roots: Gentrification, community gardens, and the Puerto Ricans of the Lower East Side. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
  903. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  904. Power at the Roots demonstrates efforts by both old and new residents of Losaida on New York’s Lower East Side to prevent the destruction of community gardens by gentrification-induced upscale developments. The book reveals the role gardens serve in a changing neighborhood, as well as the methods of resistance residents rely on in an effort to save them.
  905. Find this resource:
  906.  
  907. Mele, Christopher. 2000. Selling the Lower East Side: Real estate, culture and resistance in New York City. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press.
  908. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  909. Mele reveals a legacy of resistance to gentrification on the Lower East Side; a legacy that draws together a diverse set of actors—from artists to the homeless.
  910. Find this resource:
  911.  
  912. Newman, Kathe, and Elvin K. Wyly. 2006. The right to stay put, revisited: Gentrification and resistance to displacement in New York City. Urban Studies 43.1: 23–57.
  913. DOI: 10.1080/00420980500388710Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  914. Responding to recent quantitative analyses suggesting that displacement through gentrification is more limited than initial scholarship outlined, Newman and Wyly report on their mixed-methods study of New York. They find that public housing and rent regulation—the primary institutional buffers against displacement—are under threat, and that residents rely on an increasingly diverse and creative set of practices to resist displacement.
  915. Find this resource:
  916.  
  917. Ocejo, Richard E. 2011. The early gentrifier: Weaving a nostalgia narrative on the Lower East Side. City and Community 10.3: 285–310.
  918. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6040.2011.01372.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  919. Drawing on interviews with and observation of first-wave gentrifiers on the Lower East Side, Ocejo charts their nostalgia for an earlier phase of gentrification, and resistance to an influx of new nightlife establishments. Ocejo argues that their nostalgia and resistance are rooted in a desire to claim symbolic ownership of the neighborhood; an ownership they justify, in large part, based on their presence in the neighborhood during its early gentrification.
  920. Find this resource:
  921.  
  922. Solnit, Rebecca, and Susan Schwartzenberg. 2001. Hollow city: The siege of San Francisco and the crisis of American urbanism. New York: Verso.
  923. Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
  924. Relying on photographs, personal experience, and research, Solnit and Schwartzenberg decry San Francisco’s advancing gentrification, identifying it as threat to diversity, the arts, and place character.
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!