Pros And Cons Of Gentrification

Ever since the 1960s, there has been an influx of high-income populations moving into urban areas from the suburbs. This phenomenon was coined ‘gentrification’ by sociologist Ruth Glass in 1964 to describe “the movement of upscale (mostly white) setters into rundown (mostly minority) neighborhoods” (Hampson). Proposition 555 has stated that in order to increase government funding and provide citizens a better life with a cleaner environment and safer community, the process of gentrification would require the destruction of some old and unsafe houses. Since then, this policy has received mixed reception from all walks of life. Protagonists, on one side, consider gentrification as the solution to current hard urban issues. Antagonists, on the other side, believe
Nonetheless, studies conducted by Lance Freeman, an assistant professor of urban planning at Columbia University, suggest that there is merely a slight connection between urban renewal and displacement (Hampson). He says that in gentrified neighborhoods, the chance of a poor being dislocated is only 0.5% greater in comparison with a non-gentrified one (Hampson). Freeman believes that “although higher costs sometimes force poor residents to leave gentrif[ied] neighborhoods, other changes—more jobs, safer streets, better trash pickup—encourage them to stay” (Hampson). Besides coming to the same conclusion, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh and Duke University, also show that black householders with high school degrees account for 33% of the total neighborhood income, 13% greater than that of white householders (Kiviat). In conclusion, as urban planner Duany says, gentrification has proved to be “the rising tide that lifts all boats” because it provides an effective solution to the economy, social issues, as well as environmental justice that benefit all social