Gentrification refers to a shift in urban population from poor to wealthy. It is a contentious topic that poses a significant challenge to both urban planners and local politicians. This past spring, local political leaders acknowledged that the latest wave of gentrification has occurred at an increasingly rapid pace and to the detriment of cities' long-time residents. This article explores how cities' attempt to attract young professionals out of the suburbs and into city limits has been successful—but perhaps too successful. In order to appeal to the next generation of upper class citizens, city funds have been used to institute tax breaks for luxury condominiums and to build new bike lanes, dog parks, and sports fields. The influx of wealthy individuals has caused home prices to skyrocket in cities across America, and, as a result, working and middle-class populations are increasingly feeling the pinch. For example, in South Philadelphia, Rene Goodwin saw the value of her home rise from $90,000 to $281,000 in just a single year. Even more startling, then, is the fact that, one-fourth of Boston's citizens are facing similar challenges.
The pattern of gentrification in American cities relates to Tiebout's model of consumer-voters. Over the past years, it would appear that city governments have selected a revenue-expenditure pattern that appeals to the preferences of wealthy citizens. These individuals, in turn, have voted with their feet and moved into luxury developments that are being built right beside and within working class neighborhoods. The gentrification process demonstrates that the individuals who might come closest to meeting some of Tiebout's demanding assumptions—namely full mobility and a large choice set of communities—are the wealthy. Middle and working class folk, on the other hand, do not have this opportunity, and their ultimate decision to move is much less a matter of choice and much more a matter of external pressure.
No comments:
Post a Comment