Revisiting the Diversity of Gentrification: Neighbourhood Renewal Processes in Brussels and Montreal

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of neighbourhood renewal processes in Brussels and Montreal based on a typology of such processes wherein gentrification is precisely delimited. In this way, it seeks to break with the extensive use of a chaotic conception of gentrification referring to the classic stage model when dealing with the geographical diversity of neighbourhood renewal, within or between cities. In both Brussels and Montreal, the gentrification concept only adequatly describes the upward movement of very restricted parts of the inner city, while neighbourhood renewal in general more typically comprises marginal gentrification, upgrading and incumbent upgrading. Evidence drawn from the case studies suggests that each of these processes is relevant on its own-i.e. linked to a particular set of causal factors-rather than composing basically transitional states within a step-by-step progression towards a common gentrified fate. Empirical results achieved in Brussels and Montreal suggest that a typology such as the one implemented in this article could be used further in wider research aimed at building a geography of neighbourhood renewal throughout Western cities.

From London to Mumbai and Back Again: Gentrification and Public Policy in Comparative Perspective

“…Such a perspective already has a rich and productive intellectual tradition within gentrification research, arguably more so than in other strands of urban literature. Analytical frameworks have ranged from trans-Atlantic comparisons (Carpenter and Lees, 1995;Van Criekingen and Decroly, 2003), trans-continental comparisons (Slater, 2004), inter-urban national comparisons (Ley, 1996) to intra-urban comparative perspectives (Butler and Robson, 2003;Hackworth, 2002).…”

Le retour à la rue comme support de la gentrification

“…Schématiquement, après la phase d'accession au confort matériel qui a caractérisé les décennies de l'après-guerre, une partie des classes moyennes, et notamment les nouvelles générations, ont aspiré à d'autres satisfactions, centrées sur l'expression de soi et l'enrichissement personnel (Bourdin, 1984 ;Ley, 2003). Parallèlement, le style de vie étudiant, et le rapport à la ville auquel il est associé, s'est diffusé bien au-delà de la population étudiante, pourtant elle-même en forte croissance (Van Criekingen ;Decroly, 2003). Ainsi, pour une part significative des classes moyennes, la localisation périurbaine est apparue comme le choix d'individus matérialistes, plus concernés par leur confort matériel et familial que par les stimulations offertes par la vie en centre-ville.…”

Who benefits from home ownership support policies in Brussels?

“…At the beginning of the decade, some of the neighbourhoods targeted by 'revitalisation' policies experienced a form of gentrification -i.e. the gradual metamorphosis of central disadvantaged neighbourhoods into well-to-do neighbourhoods, via the renovation of buildings, a change in the population and an increase in the social status of the inhabitants (see Van Criekingen and Decroly, 2003). The analysis of migrations from these areas shows an 'outgoing flow' of disadvantaged populations, which indicates that in these neighbourhoods, gentrification leads to the gradual eviction of initial populations (Van Criekingen, 2006).…”