Abstract

This paper essentially argues that contemporary gentrification ought to be conceived of as a prevailing, though place-specific policy strategy. What is at stake is to move beyond common but limited representations of gentrification as a mere process of neighbourhood change through which urban space is dedicated to progressively more affluent users, and to specifically acknowledge the role of state actors in fostering this socio-spatial transformation. The paper mainly builds on findings brought out by selected – and still quite rare – works seeking to empirically document and make sense of the emergence or consolidation of a pro-gentrification coherence across changes in diverse policy fields (e.g. housing, tourism, culture, infrastructures, etc.). Findings brought out of analyses conducted in Paris, Roubaix and Antwerp are particularly scrutinized. They transversally suggest that following a pro-gentrification policy agenda practically means combining actions on demand and supply of gentrifying spaces together with the production of legitimating representations ; moreover, they stress that the arrangement of a pro-gentrification policy agenda is a social construct built on strategic (re-)organisation of urban governance structures. These findings suggest that reinforcing the empirical bases of the multifaceted and place-specific ties between gentrification and urban policy ought to be considered as a priority task for researchers seeking to make sense of contemporary urban change, while sustaining the critical essence of the gentrification concept and further developing its capacity to mobilise around issues of social justice and class domination in cities.

Highlights

  • Refer here to a recent critique addressed to the related, and rapidly expanding literature centred upon the notion of urban neoliberalism

  • Even social housing policy is used here to promote gentrification, notably through the prioritisation of “social mixing” in new or existing projects over the expansion of the supply of units dedicated to low-income groups

  • 14 A transversal appraisal of these particular case studies suggests that following a progentrification policy agenda practically means activating three categories of tools, that is, combining actions on (1) demand and (2) supply of gentrifying / gentrified spaces, and (3) on the production of legitimating representations of gentrification as something positive for all

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Refer here to a recent critique addressed to the related, and rapidly expanding literature centred upon the notion of urban neoliberalism. It echoes – and only very modestly adds to – a growing body of empirical evidence supporting the essential suggestion that gentrification today could no longer be conceived of as a process of urban change resulting from the play of market forces2, but ought to be simultaneously considered as a core element of conscious policy strategies.

Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.