Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
'community' and 'history' are often placed at the centre of such initiatives and are connected
with the promotion of the 'urban idyll' (Hoskins and Tallon, 2004).
Reid and Smith (1993: 193) noted that 'boutique landscapes of consumption emerge
catering to their gastronomic, fashion and entertainment demands and new landscapes of
production are created'. They discuss the mythology of gentrifi cation as 'frontier' (a boundary
where 'savagery' meets 'civilisation') which hides a process that is far from benign (Cresswell,
2004).
Along with supply and demand drivers of the gentrifi cation process globally, it has been
argued that the gentrifi cation of city centres has been a policy-led process (Boddy, 2007;
Davidson and Lees, 2005; Lees, 2003a, 2003b; Slater, 2006). National and local urban poli-
cies in countries such as the US and UK encouraged repopulation and refurbishment through
brownfi eld redevelopment, mixed-use development and social mixing (Davidson, 2008;
Lees, 2008; Slater, 2006).
There is also a clear link between gentrifi cation processes and the recent explosion of
cultural (and particularly creativity) rhetoric in urban policy domains (and particularly
in places experiencing the effects of creative class-based policy instruments; see Wilson,
Chapter 16
of this volume for more on this theme).
The majority of the research being undertaken in the fi eld of gentrifi cation is closely
linked to more recent manifestations of the original process, as we will discuss briefl y below.
New forms of gentrifi cation
Multiple types of gentrifi cation have been identifi ed in recent decades which illustrate the
expansion, diversity and heterogeneous nature of the process. The 'mutation of gentrifi cation'
(Lees
et al.
, 2008) casts light on changing cities and the role of non-housing uses (such as
tourism), although there are contemporary concerns that commentators are stretching the
term 'gentrifi cation' too far (Boddy, 2007) and that the political salience of gentrifi cation is
'collapsing under the weight of its expanding defi nition' (Lees
et al.
, 2008: 129).
Public urban space or amenity gentrifi cation (Zukin, 2010) has been applied to upscaled
public spaces (parks, plazas) which act as middle-class spaces popular with the so-called
'stroller set', also linked to neotraditionalism (see above) and 'glocalised' living and consump-
tion needs. 'Stroller set' is representative of 'pacifi ed' areas of safety and security with high
amenity value. Urban public space is also increasingly part of urban tourism consumption
circuits, particularly with the injection of 'starchitect' design value in high-profi le and iconic
architectural and green space projects (for example, Jean Nouvel's Parc Central del Poblenou
in Barcelona).
Heritage preservation and gentrifi cation are also closely linked and exemplify and idealise
the urban idyll and neotraditionalism. Local residents' associations and earlier waves of
pioneer gentrifi ers often value heritage, history and the vernacular against more recent
arrivals who are exercising cultural capital.
Commercial services and amenities (Sutton, 2010) are central to regeneration and gentri-
fi cation schemes and are particularly relevant for tourism in terms of leisure and cultural
consumption by residents and non-residents. The use of these services and facilities acts to
blur the boundaries between residents and non-residents (Lloyd, 2010; Maitland, 2007;
Richards and Wilson, 2007a). In fact, Zukin argues that it is the more visible entrepreneurial
commercial activities of the 'creatives' (galleries, shops, cafes, creative spaces) that stimulate
residential gentrifi cation rather than their own physical presence in a neighbourhood
per se
(
bigthink.com,
2011).
