gentrification

II. THE GOAL OF REVITALIZATION: EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENTThe process of gentrification is set in the context of the politically charged urbandevelopment process, and is best understood in that context. The market and the non-profit andpublic sectors work with each other and people and neighborhoods of urban America to produceeconomic and community growth, change, and development. As we will describe in greater detailbelow, sometimes these private-, public- and non-profit sector actions combine and result in theprocess of gentrification, producing some positive outcomes, some negative outcomes, and manyoutcomes that are positive for some and negative for others. Against what standard should wemeasure this process, its causes, consequences and prescriptions?We argue that city officials, developers, policymakers, advocates, business owners andresidents should support the goal of “equitable development.” We define equitable development asthe creation and maintenance of economically and socially diverse communities that are stable overthe long term, through means that generate a minimum of transition costs that fall unfairly on lowerincome residents. 1 While public and non-profit officials may easily support such an idea, thebusiness community should support it as well. Without equitable development, the long-termprospects of a neighborhood, or the metropolitan area in which it is set, can dim. Equitabledevelopment is something that should be planned for and facilitated whether gentrification pressuresexist or not.We leave it to others to further flesh out the concept of equitable development. 2 However,we believe it can form the framework for evaluating whether an aspect of the gentrification process is“good” or “bad,” for debating whether it warrants hearty support or intervention, and for deciding thenext steps to take in optimizing the positive aspects of gentrification and minimizing or eliminating itsdownsides. For example, gentrification, by definition, creates a greater income mix and can offergreater economic opportunity to those that need it, both of which are consistent with equitabledevelopment. At the same time, the displacement that is part of gentrification can pose very largefinancial and social costs on those it affects. While the government and private sector cannot beexpected to reimburse original residents and businesses for all financial and social costs they bearas a result of gentrification, we should try to ensure that these costs of community change do not fallinappropriately hard on those least able to bear them.With equitable development the goal, and gentrification a process that spurs or impedes thatgoal, we now turn to analyzing gentrification dynamics in greater detail.1 It is increasingly clear that concentrated poverty and segregated neighborhoods are bad for children, bad forthe viability of their communities, bad for the economic health of cities, and bad for surrounding suburbaneconomies. Therefore, the definition includes social and economic diversity. We discuss the research on thisissue later in the paper. In addition, a classic “market failure” warranting public intervention occurs whenmarket forces generate inequitable effects, for instance, for poor people. As a result, the definition includes acaveat regarding transition costs.2 PolicyLink has produced several documents summarizing the literature and thinking of leading scholars andpractitioners on the concept of equitable development, especially as it applies to urban areas in the regionalcontext. See the bibliography entries under PolicyLink.4