Cody Hochstenbach

An anatomy of gentrification processes: variegating causes of neighbourhood change

Several theoretical debates in gentrification literature deal with the role and importance of migration, in situ social mobility, and demographic change in urban social change. These debates focus primarily on structural processes. However, we have comparatively little insight into how and to what degree different mechanisms actually underpin upgrading in urban neighbourhoods. This paper uses Dutch register data to show how residential mobility, social mobility, and demographic change each contribute to gentrification in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. First, our findings show that residential mobility remains key to understanding the growth of higher-income residents in gentrifiying neighbourhoods. At the same time, social mobility and demographic change— notably ageing—are most important in explaining dwindling numbers of lower-income residents. Second, large differences exist across neighbourhoods. By mapping three idealtypical drivers of gentrification, we show how the migration-based ‘displacement model’ occurs predominantly in upgrading neighbourhoods with a high status. Conversely, in low-status upgrading neighbourhoods social mobility is more important in explaining gentrification. These different forms of upgrading occur simultaneously in both cities and should be integrated to advance our understanding of gentrification as a process that is both widespread and occurs in different, ever-changing forms across neighbourhoods.

Intergenerational support shaping residential trajectories: Young people leaving home in a gentrifying city:

Parental support, in both financial and non-financial ways, is important in explaining the residential trajectories of young people leaving home. For instance, the influence of parental support on the ability to leave home or enter homeownership is well established. This study adds a dimension by investigating how inequalities in terms of parental background – particularly assets – are spatially articulated. More specifically, we study whether parental background influences the types of neighbourhoods young people leaving home move to. Drawing on the case of Amsterdam, we show that these ‘fledglings’, despite their generally very modest income, disproportionally move to gentrification neighbourhoods. Moreover, fledglings with wealthy parents are even more likely to move to both early gentrifying and expensive mature-gentrification neighbourhoods. Gentrification research should therefore also take into account the importance of middle class social reproduction strategies as well as the potential intergenerational transfer of (financial) resources – rather than merely personal financial situation – in shaping housing outcomes and spatial inequalities of young people leaving home. Drawing on parental support, young people may be able to outbid other households and hence exclude them from gentrifying neighbourhoods. Consequently, parental wealth and other resources can thus contribute to gentrification and exclusion.

Gentrification and the suburbanization of poverty: changing urban geographies through boom and bust periods

ABSTRACT Many postindustrial cities across Europe and other contexts are marked by growing social–spatial inequalities, housing liberalization, and gentrification, which limit the housing options of low-income households. We investigated changes in the residential moves of different low-income households (working poor, low-to-middle income, and unemployed) in the Amsterdam and Rotterdam urban regions for the time period 2004–2013. We found an overarching trend for the suburbanization of poverty toward the urban peripheries and surrounding regions. While this trend appears to be relatively crisis resistant in the tight Amsterdam housing context, it is more cyclical in Rotterdam and has slowed following the global financial crisis. Low-to-middle income and unemployed households are increasingly moving to the urban regions surrounding cities, particularly to higher density satellite towns. Nevertheless, a growing number of working poor households remain highly urbanized, employing various coping strategies to acquire housing. This paper reveals how the suburbanization of poverty is both a direct process of poor households moving from city to suburb, and a broader indirect process caused by exclusionary mechanisms such as the decreasing accessibility and affordability of inner-urban neighborhoods, which reflect broader changes in the geography and socioeconomic patterning of urban regions.

State-led Gentrification and the Changing Geography of Market-oriented Housing Policies

Abstract Governments in a wide range of contexts have long pursued policies of social mixing to disperse poverty concentrations, attract middle class residents, and manage disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Drawing on longitudinal and spatial housing data for the case of Amsterdam, this paper shows that the dominant instruments to facilitate social mixing have changed over time. Policy focus has shifted from large-scale urban renewal projects and the demolition of social rental housing to the sale of existing social rental dwellings. The changing nature of tenure restructuring also brings about a changing geography: while urban renewal was mostly concentrated in post-war neighbourhoods of socio-economic decline, social housing sales are increasingly concentrated in inner city neighbourhoods where already existing gentrification processes are amplified. These shifts need to be considered within their wider policy context. Local policies increasingly focus on catering to the preferences of middle class households, while welfare state restructuring and national austerity measures push policies that cut back on social rental housing. Thus, this paper demonstrates that the demise of social rent has accelerated under conditions of market-oriented housing restructuring, and increasingly occurs in high demand neighbourhoods where current housing policies push gentrification.

Stakeholder representations of gentrification in Amsterdam and Berlin: a marginal process?

In recent years, several studies have highlighted how gentrification strategies are imposed under the discursive umbrella of ‘social mixing’. However, most evidence is based on Anglo-Saxon experiences. This paper sets out to expand the geography of gentrification by looking at the representation of processes and policies of gentrification as put forward by key stakeholders in Nord-Neukölln (Berlin) and Indische Buurt (Amsterdam). It shows that in both contexts, stakeholders and policy documents engage with the concept of gentrification, rather than avoid it. Due to public-policy influence and local criticisms, this engagement differs between both cases. In Nord-Neukölln, the term is heavily contested and policy-makers attempt to refute accusations of gentrification, while in the Indische Buurt, the process is explicitly pursued as a positive policy instrument by policy-makers. Different representations within each case are shown to be influenced by the characteristics of in-moving and out-moving residents; the employed timeframe and the perceived influence of institutions on urban regeneration.

Spatializing the intergenerational transmission of inequalities: Parental wealth, residential segregation, and urban inequality

Young adults in many contexts struggle on the housing market. Parental support has become increasingly important in allowing young adults to enter homeownership or to acquire secure housing in general. Consequently, the intergenerational transmission of inequalities has become more pronounced with regard to housing. Using longitudinal individual-level register data from Statistics Netherlands, this paper investigates how and to what extent parental wealth background is associated with socio-spatial inequalities and residential segregation in Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Results show that spatial segregation based on parental wealth is strong. Parental wealth background has notable spatial consequences, as it both deepens existing socio-spatial divides and establishes new ones. The influence of parental wealth background on socio-spatial divides is stronger in Amsterdam than in Rotterdam, suggesting that especially in the high demand Amsterdam housing context, young adults may need to draw on parental resources to outcompete other households and/or to acquire housing in expensive areas.

Exclusion as urban policy: The Dutch ‘Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems’:

The Dutch government introduced the Act on Extraordinary Measures for Urban Problems in 2006 to bolster local regeneration efforts. The act enables local governments to stop specific groups of deprived households from moving into designated neighbourhoods. More specifically, the Act allows local governments to refuse a residence permit to persons who have lived in the metropolitan region for less than six years and who do not receive an income from work, pensions or student loans. The policy is based on the idea that reducing the influx of poor newcomers improves liveability by providing a temporary relief of the demand for public services and by making neighbourhoods demographically ‘balanced’ or ‘socially mixed’. This review examines the socio-spatial effects of the Act in Rotterdam between 2006 and 2013. While the Act produces socio-demographic changes, the state of the living environment in designated areas seems to be worsening rather than improving. Our findings show that the policy restricts the rights of excluded groups without demonstrably improving safety or liveability. The review concludes with a reflection on how the Act may signify a broader change in European statecraft and urban policy.

Shrinkage and housing inequality: Policy responses to population decline and class change

ABSTRACT Parkstad Limburg, located in the south of the Netherlands, represents a former industrial area facing structural shrinkage and economic decline in a relatively strongly regulated environment. Though regional policies were initially slow to fully recognize the reality of shrinkage, they are currently well under way. This article identifies to what extent housing policies aim to go beyond managing shrinkage and instead address housing needs of current residents to create equitable social outcomes. We subsequently investigate how specific housing interventions have impacted the region’s changing class composition, using individual-level longitudinal register data from Statistics Netherlands. Our findings highlight increasing socioeconomic and sociospatial inequalities in the wake of shrinkage. Policies have a mixed influence on these dynamics, dampening certain inequalities but amplifying others. Our analyses underscore the limited effectiveness of policies in combating housing mismatch even in a strongly regulated market and indicate key trade-offs for regional governments in managing shrinkage.