Paper 2

 Running Head: URBAN SOCIOLOGY AND THE PROCESS OF GENTRIFICATION          1

Urban Sociology and the Process of Gentrification

Carmel DiCapua, RN

Molloy College

                                                                                                                                                2

            The term”gentrification”as it applies to urban sociology was coined by British sociologist Ruth Glass in 1964 and it concerned her research for urban changes as they evolved specifically in London during the 1950’s and 60’s (Lees,2012). It refers to a social and economic phenomenon whereby people of wealth who are thus “gentrified” move into a neighborhood which is populated by poorer people. The buildings may be run-down and bought for cheaper prices. They are then restored and rented or sold at a profit. The restoration of affordable housing into pricier, upscale models increases rents and limits affordability for current residents. This inevitably leads to a displacement of vibrant working class communities. Replacement housing for those displaced persons may not be provided.  Movers-in may be communities of artists who need studio space. They may occupy former warehouses and create interesting working spaces from lofts. These changes in the community enhance desirability for the locale because they offer interesting perspectives for people with more money. The trendiness attracts other fashionable shops which attract wealthier people further marginalizing the poor. The average income rises and the family size decreases. Minorities with low income and depreciated property would find financing hard to get. Those with more resources could pick up great architectural homes at bargain process (Betancur, 2002).

            Historically speaking, this is a newer topic for research and urban sociologists observed specific patterns which play out in the process of gentrification. In addition, as these patterns are being studied, new sequences for this sociological phenomenon have become apparent. The original sequellae for gentrification was entry of small investors, developers followed by displacement of local population and lastly resistance (Hackworth, 2002). Post recession

                                                                                                                                                 3

gentrification differs in that the process is initiated by corporate developers. In addition there is increased involvement by local and federal governments. Oppositional groups are more marginalized and gentrification has diffused into more remote neighborhoods. A domino effect exists. Globally, these conflicts are real and can play out in violence depending on the society’s degree of polar marginalization and legal customs. Gentrification is played out all over the world.

            As world population increases in geometric proportions, people vie for affordable roves over their heads. The bottom line is that people need a place to live. Economics are limiting factors in decisions about housing. Cultural context is important too because people gravitate towards groups with similar values and beliefs. The cultural base could be ethnic, religious, life style, age or other categories. Once basic needs are met, choice of housing is influenced by life style and ability to afford desired location. These are optional choices and may be how a person wishes to represent themselves. Housing choice is a projection of self once basic needs have been met. Those with money may want to show outward signs of influence and mingle with others of similar social status. There is a group psychology inherent in these choices. To be poor means to have less choice.

            Examples of gentrification in New York City include Harlem, Clinton (formerly known as Hell’s Kitchen), DUMBO (Down Under The Manhattan Bridge Overpass), Brooklyn Heights and Williamsburgh. There have been increasing trends for government to intervene in relaxing zoning regulations to make way for gentrification. Prior to the advent of gentrification in New York City, large conglomerations of poor people were situated in projects and low income

                                                                                                                                                4

housing. This congestion of low income people brought crime and depleted resources for the community. It is healthier to have a mix of incomes in a balanced community. When there are too many poor in one area it strains the resources of the community. Improvements are unlikely. Likewise, if there are too many rich in an area, the lower income people will not be able to afford the available resources. There is a type of economic segregation which will prevail. Gradually, the poor will move out and only the rich will be able to benefit by the resources in the community. A heterogenous population will provide various resources that most people can avail themselves of. It could potentially be a more interesting type of urban setting and have a variety of cultural flavors as well.

            It takes time and experimentation to realize these outcomes. Increasingly, there is a private-corporate-governmental partnership which happens to achieve gentrification. Perhaps future urban planners will benefit by the trials of past examples. Government has an interest because commercial improvements draw greater tax revenues. An example of this is Chelsea Market. This real estate was originally owned by the National Biscuit Company. Today the Jamestown real estate development firm manages the property and has plans for expensive expansions. This has to be done in partnership with regulatory agencies in the city. The city wants to attract these kinds of improvements because it provides jobs, services and an enhanced revenue base. This type of project gentrifies but also provides jobs for both skilled and unskilled workers.

            As a conclusion, gentrification in its original form may not be the healthiest way for urban planners to create great cities. Typically, these methods stratify societies deeper into the

                                                                                                                                                5

haves and have-nots. A more moderate and viable plan is one in which room is made for an economically diverse population. We all need to live somewhere and everyone has something to offer regardless of their income level.

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

                                                                                                                                                6

                                                                        References                 

Betancur, J. J. (2002). The politics of gentrification: The case of west town in chicago. Urban Affairs Review, 37(6), 780-814. http://search.proquest.com/docview/225949814?accountid=28076

Hackworth, J. (2002). Postrecession gentrification in new york city. Urban Affairs Review, 37(6), 815-            843. http://search.proquest.com/docview/225949885?accountid=28076

Lees, L. (2012). The geography of gentrification: Thinking through comparative urbanism. Progress in          Human Geography,36(2), 155-171. doi:10.1177/0309132511412998