« The cool cities of the past…Part I - Kashgar | Home | One reason being a Wireless City could matter »
October 14, 2006
Does gentrification reduce economic diversity?
What makes great cities fun, creative and energetic places? Often it is the diverse people to see, places to go, and things to do.
What also makes cities fascinating and inspiring is that they are places that are constantly changing.
So, as everything changes, can you lose diversity? can you lose the energy and divergent ideas interacting that spawns creativity?
Maybe. I used to think yes, but upon reflecting on the issue, maybe not.
In many cases as a metropolitan area grows in popularity with international immigrants, national migrants and major employers (that in turn draw workers), the inner core city (or cities) become increasingly expensive places to live. As that happens, what happens to diversity? In particular, what happens to economic diversity — a city needs people who do every type of job from busking at the metro station to teaching to janitorial work or running a fortune-500 corporation.
(By core city I refer to the historic, namesake city in a metro area — Boston, San Francisco, Vancouver — and the metro area includes the suburbs.)
In some cases the less economically fortunate rent to stay in the inner city; others move to the suburbs in order to afford their own single family home (or even a townhouse).
The question is whether a core city loses diversity as affordability declines in a metro area. Or, is choice of community within a metro area somewhat independent of wealth and more a lifestyle choice within a family’s economic envelope.
For example, a family with a $250,000 per year income might choose to live in a smaller, historic house in a trendy neighbourhood in the urban core where housing and land prices are much higher than in the suburbs; but they might also choose to live in a much larger home in a distant suburb that might be worth the same amount. This would likely involve a commute for work and even for leisure if the family enjoys the amenities of the urban core.
In another example a family on a $35,000 per year income might choose to rent a small, dated apartment in the urban core because it is close to good schools, nice amenities, and to their jobs (allowing a shorter commute time and therefore more family time). Their other choice might be buying a small townhome in a distant suburb and many families would make this choice as a way to achieve ownership and the stability and security that goes along with it.
My gut feeling is that gentrification does not necessarily change the income mix of a core city — but it probably does impact ownership, which in turn may serve to limit the ability of workers with lower paying jobs to gain ground financially over time.
I’m going to look for statistics on economic stratification of the population in the core of gentrifying cities versus the metroarea as a whole. Stay tuned.
Topics: diversity, "back to the center", communities, revitalization |
June 16th, 2007 at 6:32 pm
As a long time resident of Park Slope, Brooklyn, I can say that gentrification here has most definitely led to shrinking diversity and a population that’s much more homogenous. Over the past 10 years or so, as property values skyrocketed and developers moved in, many lower income and ethnic residents who made the area a community sold out or were forced out by high rents. The children of middle to lower class residents had to move out of the neighborhood they grew up in and away from their families because they couldn’t compete with the what the high income earners who moved in — mostly young affluents — could pay to rent or buy.
Traditional bakeries, butcher shops, neighborhood mom and pops, have been pushed out by the high store rents; chains and banks have moved in. We see a quick turnover of newer small creative businesses because of the exorbitant rents as well.
So, on the one hand, getting the nice stores and restaurants is terrific, seeing the parks be fixed up is fantastic. On the other, the quality of life issues like crowding, stress on services (power and water, parking), cost of living, the loss of the diversity, make up a big down side.
August 14th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Post gentrification- It could be quite hard to find a” a small, dated apartment in the urban core…”
August 15th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
I live in the Washington DC area, and what’s happened here is that many minority families (e.g. Latinos, Chinese Americans) have left their old neighborhoods in the city center and moved to the suburbs because of the increased cost of property brought about by gentrification. As a result there are several areas in Virginia and Maryland where you can find a concentration of ethnic restaurants and minority owned businesses. Meanwhile, with a sports arena constructed nearby, the city’s historic Chinatown is awash in generic chain restaurants and clothing stores (who write their signs in English and Chinese in a tribute to the neighborhoods past).
August 16th, 2007 at 2:32 am
Hi everyone,
Great comments. I agree that gentrification tends to reduce ethnic diversity in many neighbourhoods. What I’m wondering is whether it significantly reduces socio-economic diversity as well to the point of creating a homogeneous group in terms of income (ie every family now earns over $120K).
Aassf, you make a good point. Maybe I’m thinking about the process of gentrification rather than the mature result. I’ll rethink this subject some more.
Meeg - Interesting story about Chinatown in Washington — so the Chinese families didn’t keep the real estate? that’s interesting.
What I’ve seen in Vancouver is that the Italian or Chinese families have kept their commercial property, but perhaps moved their families to a suburb. So, they often still run their businesses, but commute to do so — and as the coffee bar, hardware store or vege store owner-managers age, their kids who take over seem less interested in running the shop and more keen on being landlords and just renting out the space for $40 per square foot.