While certain US cities are still depopulating, others have experienced a reversal of aggregate out-migration patterns. Some scholars, politicians and real estate boosters celebrate this urban population influx, as it will likely increase property values and municipal tax bases; however, we know little about the social costs associated with the back-to-the-city movement. This study investigates the consequences of the back-to-the-city movement through a four-year (2009-2012) ethnographic case study of the revitalisation of Washington, DC's Shaw/U Street neighbourhood. The redevelopment of this African-American neighbourhood is associated with the city's 5.2 percent population increase, which occurred between 2000 and 2010. While affordable housing efforts help to keep a portion of long-term, low-income residents in place, political and cultural displacement is occurring as upper-income newcomers flock into this neighbourhood. This article contributes to the urban literature by highlighting that population influx, and associated neighbourhood revitalisation, can have important social implications.

No abstract

Objective Aggregate crime rates continue to decline in the United States despite the depth and breadth of the current foreclosure crisis. This trend calls into question conventional wisdom and prior research that suggest a causal, positive relationship between foreclosures and crime. The objective of this article is to consider an alternative argument, that foreclosures and crime are part‐and‐parcel of the same community‐level dynamics, and thus are not causally related. Methods We use random effects models to analyze community crime and foreclosure data from Chicago between 2004 and 2009. Results Findings reveal that crime and foreclosures are spuriously related; controlling for confounding factors such as concentrated disadvantage and the political hierarchy of communities renders the foreclosure‐crime association nonsignificant. Conclusion Foreclosures and crime are each explained by antecedent community characteristics. To understand why social problems are unevenly distributed across geographic space, it is necessary to investigate why power and political influence are unevenly distributed.

No abstract

No abstract