Belinda Graves
October 14, 2015
The idea of upper- and middle-income private developers coming into deteriorating
metropolitan neighborhoods to buy and renovate the houses and stores of marginalized residents
for the sole purpose of financial gain does not sit well with me. In short, gentrification has
contributed to the racial disinvestment and displacement of marginalized communities
nationwide. Throughout history, urban areas have experienced urban renewal where federal
funds are used to “remove blight and concentrated poverty by razing distressed public housing,
attracting middle-class families to new, mixed-income developments, and incentivizing the
movement of private business capital to the inner-city” (Hyra, 2012, p. 504). The funds that are
contributing to such renovations are being given to individuals who do not identify with the
communities that they are remodeling. Through examining academic literature, my goal is to
explain how the communities of marginalized minorities will benefit more if gentrification
occurs from upper-and middle-class minority investors that identify with the impoverished
communities rather than outside private developers.
In order for marginalized communities to not experience the negative impacts that can
come from gentrification, it is important to discuss how urban renewal has evolved overtime.
Derek S. Hyra uses a historical approach to claim that the United States has entered a new urban
renewal period by comparing and contrasting the old and new urban renewal periods (Hyra,
2012).
The Old Urban Renewal (1949-1974) refers to a period “when there was a massive
national effort to remove blighted properties and poverty from areas surrounding central business
districts” (Hyra, 2012, p. 502). During this time, the goal of the redevelopment was to attract
middle-class individuals and families to redeveloped areas with the hopes of increasing the
financial growth of the city. Improving cities contributed to white businesses and companies
Belinda Graves
October 14, 2015
being developed while creating few jobs for the minorities that originally occupied the
neighborhoods. Thousands of residents were uprooted due to their neighborhoods being
transformed into commercial and land-uses (Gotham, 2001). Outside investors contributed to the
problem that urban redevelopment causes; displaced residents. The idea was that rejuvenating
the communities would improve the poverty and blight that marginalized communities were
experiencing. However, that was not the case, displaced residents were shifted to different
impoverished cities throughout the nation.
The era between 1992 and 2007 has become known as the New Urban Renewal period
(Hyra, 2012). Nationally, federal programs and funds became available to motivate the
revitalization of inner-city neighborhoods. The EZ Initiative and the Hope VI were programs
that provided the funds to remove poverty-stricken areas by demolishing public housing
complexes. The idea was that the poverty and blight being experienced in these areas would
improve by demolishing public housing and changing the “urban landscape” (Hwang &
Sampson, 2014). By suggesting and proving that impoverished communities were broken
developers were granted permission to destroy the homes of many poor citizens leaving them
homeless and displaced.
When outsiders come into impoverished communities claiming renewal, they end up
doing more harm to the residents than good. Displacement always becomes a threat when
neighborhoods experience gentrification. Caitlin Cahill writes an article examining the effects
that gentrification had on young working class women in the Lower East Side of New York City
(Cahill, 2007). The women in Cahill’s study described their experiences of being displaced in
their communities through stories of families being harassed by landlords coming to collect on
rent that has been increased and witnessing people temporarily relocate and never return back to
Belinda Graves
October 14, 2015
the neighborhood. Many times, strategies such as families doubling up with other families were
described to show how people avoided displacement. Hyra investigates how displacing residents
break up important network ties and relationships in the community (Hyra, 2012). Network ties
are extremely important in impoverished communities because the residents desperately rely on
each other in times of hardship. When residents are forced to move from the neighborhoods
where they have already formed support systems it is difficult to form new ones because of the
unfamiliarity that comes with moving to a new neighborhood.
Through financial and personal investments marginalized communities can come
together and come up with a resolution for the disinvestment that inner-cities experience.
Investments supporting economic prosperity for the communities such as local businesses are
important contributions that aid in renewing neighborhoods. Michelle Boyd supports this idea
that minorities can benefit from personally investing into their own communities through her
ethnography advocating for black gentrification and the benefits that it has on minority
neighborhoods (Boyd, 2005). Boyd claims that African Americans have changed their roles
towards gentrification in the last 20 years and “those who support attracting middle-class blacks
to the community see their financial and personal investment as a form of race uplift” (Boyd,
2005, p. 265). When outsiders who have no emotional connection to these impoverished
communities come in for urban renewal there is a monetary profit to be gained at the end of the
transformation. On the other hand, when middle-class minorities come into these devastated
cities for improvement, their determination to renew most likely comes from the benefits that the
long-time residents experience due to the renewal. Thus, a new way to look at gentrification
emerges when minorities that identify emotionally with at-risk communities promote and invest
in its regrowth and renewal.
Belinda Graves
October 14, 2015
When minorities identify with impoverished communities as their basis for revitalization
it can serve as a sense of accomplishment for themselves as well as the residents who live in the
communities. Boyd elaborates on this point when arguing; “proponents of black gentrification
see attracting middle-class investors as a strategy for ‘uplifting the race’ (Boyd, 2005, p. 269).
She further explains that the emergence of minority developers investing into devastated innercities can help with preventing displacement and disinvestment in the communities. The
consistent income that an emerging middle-class will generate will produce jobs and aid in
maintaining the neighborhoods. Land that is being utilized and in safe condition will be a
strategy that can be used to prevent private developers from purchasing already used land.
Having this sense of security can be uplifting not just individually but also as a whole
community. Identifying with the people who are investing in and stimulating the community
economically allows for young people to believe that they, too, can own a home or business as
well.
America has experienced two urban renewal periods and each time communities and
residents are left disinvested and displaced. The evolution of gentrification has contributed to
literature advocating for the upper- and middle-class minorities that have the ability to invest into
impoverished communities that they identify with. The presence of minority investors brings
relief to the community because when investors are not motivated on the basis of financial gain
but for the good of the public then more benefits for the community will emerge. The economy
can begin to stabilize through the emergence of jobs and the income that will begin circulating
throughout the community that emerges from the investments. The presence of investors that
resemble the individuals in the neighborhood is uplifting to the people and brings about a feeling
of security and hopefulness.
Belinda Graves
October 14, 2015
Works Cited
Boyd, M. (2005). The Downside of Racial Uplift: The Meaning of Gentrification in an African
American Neighborhood. City & Society , 265-288.
Cahill, C. (2007). Negotiating Grit and Glamour: Young Women of Color and the Gentrification
of the Lower East Side. City & Society , 202-231.
Gotham, K. F. (2001). A City Without Slums: Urban Renewal, Public Housing, and Downtown
Revitalization in Kansas City, Missouri. American Journal of Economics and Sociology , 285316.
Hwang, J., & Sampson, R. J. (2014). Divergent Pathways of Gentrification: Racial Inequality
and the Social Order of Renewal in Chicago Neighborhoods. American Sociological Review ,
726-751.
Hyra, D. S. (2012). Conceptualizing the New Urban Renewal: Comparing the Past to the Present.
SAGE , 498-527.