The Blind Men and the Elephant: The Explanation of Gentrification Author(s): Chris Hamnett Reviewed work(s): Source:

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 16, No. 2 (1991), pp. 173-189 Published by: Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/622612 . Accessed: 09/10/2012 15:27
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley-Blackwell and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers.

http://www.jstor.org

173

the men andthe Theblind explanation elephant: of gentrification

CHRIS HAMNETT Walton TheOpenUniversity, inGeography, Hall, Lecturer Senior Faculty ofSocialSciences, MK7 6AA Milton Keynes 2 January, 1991 Revised MS received
ABSTRACT debate over last10years andthe ofgentrification which haveemerged theories reviews This the the major critically paper hasattracted so much andhas reason debate Itargues them. hassurrounded which interest, thegentrification the that why which human ofcontemporary isthat been so hard theoretical itisoneofkey highlights geography battlegrounds fought, It anddemand. andculture, andsupply andconsumption, andagency, structure the between capital production arguments rent for havebeenadvanced which eachofthetwomajor alsoargues (the to account gap that gentrification explanations ofwhich isnecessary each arepartial ofgentrifiers) andthe that itargues but notsufficient. Finally, explanations, production ofdevalued areas andhousing ofthe must involve for anintegrated both production explanation gentrification explanation andreproduction andtheir ofgentrifiers andthe patterns. consumption specific production Residential KEYWORDS:Gentrification, Production, change Housing, Theory, Consumption,

INTRODUCTION and thedebateover The gentrification phenomenon, its significance, processes,explanationand effects ofspace in have occupieda remarkably largeamount the scholarly journalsover the last 10 years (see and Williams, 1986 forrecent Hamnett, 1984; Smith have been In Annals there the alone, bibliographies). andSmith articles by Ley(1980; 1986; 1987),Schaffer (1987b) and Badcock(1989). (1986),Smith in a large has now been identified Gentrification numberof cities in North America,Europe and the1970s butdespiteitsexpansionduring Australia, smallscale and very and 1980s, it is stilla relatively compared geographically-concentrated phenomenon and innercitydecline. to post-warsuburbanization to it as Islandsof refers Berry(1985) dismissively renewal in seas ofdecay.It is therefore to important ask why so muchattention has been devotedto the can be subject.At least fivepossible explanations These are outlinedin ascendingorderof identified. it and somewhatinstrumentally, First, importance. can be suggestedthatgentrification has provideda convenientsubjectfora new generation of urban and on the lookout for sociologists geographers
Trans.Inst.Br. Geogr. N.S. 16: 173-189 (1991) ISSN: 0020-2754

novel and potentially interestingcity-specific of one-off, research topics.Hence the largenumber locallybased case-studies. is that A second, andmoreconvincing explanation a to the has major challenge gentrification posed of residential locationand urban traditional theories social structure (Hamnett,1984). Neighbourhood as a one-way was viewedbyHoytandBurgess change process where 'the wealthy seldom reverse their intotheobsoletehousing stepsand move backwards which they are giving up' (Hoyt, 1939, p. 118). thedominant undermines Gentrification assumption downwards thatfiltering is a uni-directional process in whichlowerincomegroupsmove intoprogressively deteriorated housing,and it challengesthe Alonso's 'structural' underlying explicitassumption thatthe preference of theurbanland market theory forspace and low densities are farmore important to the central thanaccessibility city.Finally, gentrior evofication undermines existing 'stage theories' models of urbanresidential lutionary changewhich see middleclass suburbanization as the finalstage to the of a progressionfrom the pre-industrial industrial thatas a city.Ley (1981) has commented of: result
in Great Britain Printed

174

CHRIS HAMNETT

ofthepastdecade, sections of therevitalization The fifth, and arguably, the most important process exinner have a transformation the city post-industrial begun for theprominence ofgentrification inconplanation from oflabouring classes toward a zoneof thehomes urbangeographical is that it literature, reminiscent ofthe inner-most residential in temporary privilege ring one of key theoretical and ideological represents model of the If trends Sjoberg's city. pre-industrial present in urban geography,and indeed in battlegrounds the social ofthe continue, geography nineteenth-century human geographyas a whole, betweenthe liberal industrial evenappear scholars ofthe tourban city may humanists who stress thekeyroleof choice,culture, future as a temporary interlude a more to historically and consumer demand,and the strucofhigher-status adjacent consumption persistent pattern segregation turalMarxistswho stressthe role of capital,class, downtown core tothe 1981, (Ley, p. 145). and supply.Gentrification is one of the production The thirdreason forthe emergenceof gentrifi- main arenasof conflict betweenthe proponents of cationas a central research issueliesinthepolicyand culture, and humanagency,and thepropreference debatesregarding dis- ponents oftheimperatives ofcapitalandprofitability. political gentrification-related Whereasgentrification has been seen by Indeed,two ofthemajorcombatants, David Leyand placement. someas thesaviour oftheinner a halt Neil Smith have been closelyengaged in widerdecities, heralding to decadesofwhitemiddle classflight and residential bates aboutepistemology and explanation in human abandonment and offering an increasedtax base geography as a whole[seeDuncanand Ley,1982 and and Hughes, 1983) others Smith, (Sumka,1979; Sternlieb 1982; 1987c). it as a threat to inner class areas To the extentthatthisinterpretation is correct, regard cityworking LeGates is a frontier not just 1981; Hartman, 1979; Marcuse, 1986; (Smith, 1986) (Ley, gentrification and Hartman, but 1986) and a preludeto the wholesale physically, economically, sociallyand culturally, conversion ofpartsoftheinner cityintoa bourgeois also theoretically, ideologicallyand politically.It and Smith, a contested zone betweenradi(Schaeffer 1986). boundary playground comprises A fourth, and related is that different theories and And it is cally explanation, gentrifiexplanations. cation can be seen to constitute one of the major arguably this aspect of gentrification, above all re- others, which has keptthegentrification debateat the 'leading edges' of contemporary metropolitan as suburbanization and inner forefront of urban literature forover a Just city structuring. geographical decline theleadingedges ofurban restruc- decade. The gentrification debate is one played for comprised in the 1950s and 1960s, so gentrification is high theoretical and ideologicalstakes. Not surpristuring one oftheleading withthe contested, arguedto represent edges ofurban ingly,it has also been fiercely in the and 1970s or of at 1980s. and By restructuring slowing proponents production profitability sniping inner loss and the advocates of consumption and choice and vice citymiddleclasspopulation reversing a partial versa.As Schaeffer and Smith stated: (1986) clearly housing decay, gentrification represents reversalof previoustrends. Fromthis perspective, like suburbanization beforeit, highgentrification, debate over onthe issue of the causes hascome tocenter of capitalswitching between lightsthe importance basedvs. consumption basedexplanations production different sectors oftheeconomy anddifferent of in thisdebate... parts positions .... Eachof thedifferent thecity(Smith, involves a larger theoretical 1979; Harvey,1978; 1980; Badcock, commitment the concerning urban and is 1989; King,1989a, 1989b, 1989c). This argument way inwhich spaceis continually patterned andSmith, 1986, (Schaeffer p. 350). repatterned developed by Smith and Williams (1986) who has other that suggest, among things, gentrification to be seenas partofthechanging international spatial And Rose (1984) notesin hersympathetic of critique division oflabour, and theemergence ofglobalcities Marxist that: analysesofgentrification withcontrol and command functions as partofa new urbanheirarchy dominated by flowsof finance capihas insisted Marxist workon gentrification thatthe tal.Thisis leadingto a restructuring ofboththeurban aboutthis is to begin theorising process place 'correct' and and of intra-urban Schaeffer heirarchy space. of gentrified of thecommodities withtheproduction Smith(1986) thusrejectthe claimsof 'minimalists' I usetheword'correct' to draw attention to dwellings. suchas Berry as a smallscale who see gentrification ona single ofinsistence thefact that this analytical type not a inthe'sphere is politically ofproduction' process.They argue that:'we are witnessing starting point inthis are... (seen . . . activities curious anomaly but a trenchant of as) ... grounded sphere restructuring motors ofchange within capitalist theprimary urbanspace' (Schaeffer society and Smith, 1986,p. 362).

The blind men andthe 175 elephant a Marxist To extent, to that the role of the state is for large approaches gentrifi-argue .... important an their in understanding havedefined cation objectives self-consciously ofgentrification in certain areas,there ..A crucial element is considerable topositivist approaches. opposition debateovertherelative to importance in the Marxistapproach, in contrast, to positivist be to individual actorsand their motivations given is that is ... not approaches, it seesthat gentrification andto thestructural roleofthestate. In somerespects ofindividuals reductible to thebehaviour (Rose,1984, the debate over the role of the state in therefore, pp.49-50). reflects and embodiesthewidergentrigentrification fication debatebetweentheproponents of structure Itis thisaspectofgentrification, thatofintellectual and agency(Gregory, 1981). The paper is dividedintonine sections. The first battlegroundbetween competing and radically that I intendto sectiondefines and outlines thecriteria opposed theoretical gentrification perspectives, focuson in thisarticle. The second and third sectionsoutAlthoughseveralalternative forexplanation. have been identified line and assess The fourth and fifth (Hamnett, Ley's explanatory emphases approach. 'rentgap' 1984; Ley, 1986; Smith,1986), notably those of sectionsoutlineand assess Smith'sinitial andurban of life-style amenity; thesis.The sixthsectionstressesthe importance changesindemography, landandhousing in market and urban econ- the 'production of gentrifiers' and theirlocational dynamics omicactivity and employment in essence preferences, the seventhsection examinesSmith's structures, and his attempt to incorporate conthey collapse into two main competingsets of reformulations The first, associatedwiththe sumptioninto his theoretical and the framework, explanations. primarily workof Smithhas stressed theproduction of urban eighth outlines theelements ofan integrated theory. of thehousingand landmarket, The final section summarizesand concludes the space,theoperation socialactorssuchas argument. theroleofcapitaland collective and finance on the institutions mortgage developers The second,which supplyof gentrifiable property. Smithhas termedthe consumption side argument, GENTRIFICATION: A DEFINITION AND focuseson the production of gentrifiers and their CRITERIA FOR EXPLANATION associated cultural, and consumption reproductive As a to the outlineand analysisof the preliminary orientations 1982; Moore, (Ley,1980; 1981; Mullins, we first needto define competing arguments, gentrifi1982; Rose,1984;Williams, 1984;Beauregard, 1986). and establish thecriteria fora comprehensive cation, This paper arguesthatboth of the two principal againstwhichvarioustheoriescan be theoretical on gentrification are partial explanation, perspectives assessed and evaluated. Hamnett (1984, p. 284) fromthe totality of the phenomenon, abstractions defined as: gentrification and have focusedon different aspectsto theneglect of other, LikeAesop's fable elements. a physical, social andcultural equallycrucial economic, Simultaneously oftheblindmenand theelephant, each of themajor involves the Gentrification phenomenon. commonly invasion or higher-income of theories has perceivedonly partof the elephantof by middle-class groups or multiThe theoretical are previously working-class neighbourhoods two gentrification. perspectives areas' andthe ordisplace'twilight occupied replacement rather thancompeting. Thishas subcomplementary of of the It involves the ment many original occupants. and the initial sequentlybeen slowly appreciated, renovation or rehabilitation ofwhatwas frephysical tendencies have been watered down to exclusionary a highly stockand its deteriorated quently housing someextent. The gradual ofan integrated emergence ofitsnewowners. to meet therequirements upgrading ofgentrification 1984; Beauregard, (Hamnett, theory Intheprocess, intheareas both renoaffected, housing therealization thatproduction 1986) has arisenfrom a significant vatedand unrenovated, undergoes price andconsumption arebothcrucial to a comprehensive appreciation. Such a process ofneighbourhood transition a degree involves of tenure transformation explanation. commonly from In arguing thisthesis, is paid attention toowning. renting onlylimited to the debatesover the role of the statein gentrifiSmith (1987b,p. 463) stated: cationand to the genderdimensions of theprocess (Rose, 1984; 1989) but it is contendedthat,while Thecrucial about is that itinvolves point gentrification these are essentiallysecondaryto the important, a social change notonly butalso,atthe neighbourhood central issue of productionversus consumption. scale,a physical in thehousing stockand an change et al. (1986) and Smith(1989) economic in thelandandhousing It is AlthoughCybriwsky change market.

176

CHRIS HAMNETT

this combination of social,physical, and economic thenewliberalism was tobe recognised lessbyitsprothat as anidentifiable duction schedules change than distinguishes gentrification byitsconsumption styles (Ley, ofprocesses. 1980, p. 239). process/set It is clearfrom thesedefinitions thatgentrificationLeyalso 'an understanding oftheemergarguedthat: involvesbotha changein the social composition of a priorgraspof wideing urbanlandscaperequires an areaand itsresidents, anda changeinthenature of ranging processesof change in societyitself'(Ley, thehousing stock condition (tenure, etc.)andan 1980, p. 240). In an attempt price, to identify these,Ley of gentrification will have to drew on the workof Daniel Bell on adequate explanation post-industrial coverbothaspectsoftheprocess; andthe societyand Habermason advanced thehousing He capitalism. residents. thesedefinitions to thespeciMovingfrom theoretical bedfellows, acceptedtheywere unlikely of the criteria for explanationof gentrifi- but fication in arguedtherewas: 'a deepercomplementarity I suggestthat cation, anycomprehensive explanation their see decisive a transition Both between positions. ofgentrification mustexplainfour keyaspectsofthe nineteenthand late twentiethcentury society, is particularly con- betweenthe industrial why gentrification process.First, and period(earlycapitalism) centrated in a smallnumber of large citiessuch as .... (p.240). (latecapitalism) post-industrialism Paris,London,New York,San Francisco, Toronto, involved three focusLey'sthesis keypropositions andMelbourne in (andwhyitis morelimited Sydney on economics, ing respectively politicsand culture. older industrial cities).Secondly, why gentrificationAs we shallsee later, theorderis important. at First, occursin someareasand housing and notothers, and the level of the economy,the role of declining the characteristics of the areas involved.Thirdly, it unskilled labour in the production process and the mustexplainwhichgroupsbecome gentrifiers and growing of technology in thefactory, in importance it must explain the timingof theoffice why, and fourthly, and in administration is a majorbreakwith In other words, a comprehensive thenineteenth gentrification. Thishasbeen associated with century. explanationmust address the questionsof where, a major transformation of the labourforce, with a whichareas,who,whenand why. declinein blue collarworkers and a growth of white I shallargueintheremainder ofthis each collarworkers, paperthat in the manparticularly professional, ofthemajorexplanations addresses or answers some agerial, and technical administrative Ley occupations. of thesequestions, Indeed,it can be linkedthisto the shift but not others. from a goods producing to a whileeachis ofconsiderable arguedthat explanatory service-producing society, and to the decline of in isolation ofanswering all value,theyareincapable and theriseofoffice work. industry manufacturing these questionsby virtueof theirfocusand range. The second proposition was thatpost-industrial Thereforethey constitute partialexplanationsof society is distinguished from industrial society by the limited As Smith (1979) is inparta response activeroleof government. validity. As a consequence of this, to previouswork by Ley (1978) and others, Ley's Ley arguedthat'decisionmakingand allocationof first. workwillbe considered resources is now referred to the politicalarenaand of notonlyto themarket place .... The politicization varied is interest the formerly challenging groups CULTURE AND CONSUMPTION IN THE firm hold of thebusinesslobbyon political decision POST-INDUSTRIAL CITY (Ley,1980,p. 241). Thirdly, Leyarguedthat making' In 1980 David Leypublished 'Liberal levelthere has beena re-assertion ideologyandthe at thesociocultural In this city'. and a growthof a more post-industrial paperhe setoutwhatcan of the role of individuality be seeninretrospect to be a keytheoretical statement sensuousand aesthetic amongthegrowphilosophy the originsand causes of gentrificationing numbers of the North Americanserviceclass, regarding itsfocus was ontherise oftheElectors Action particularly on theWestcoast.He concluded although that: MovementinVancouver and their of policy limiting realestateand freeway and creating a we maysee from this framework theappearance ofa development ofactors form a livablecity.In whatlaterprovedto be a red rag to ... (who) theoretically significant group theoretical to nineteenth notions century Marxist counterpoint that: analysts, Ley argued ofcapital andlabor ... a classinemergence .... With a A new ideologyof urbandevelopment was in the secure economic thepresent base,they day represent Urban an seemed to be passing from of Veblen's leisure the class,displaying making. strategy counterparts ongrowth toa concern with the oflife; canons ofgood taste, intent Their emphasis quality upontheaesthetic.

men andthe The blind elephant in and status orientated is ... consumption lifestyle ofself-actualization 1980, '(Ley, pp.242-3). pursuit

177

the transition local housingmarket, proquickening land values, through cess and fuelling inflationary the expectationsof speculationand by increasing is import- homeownersto receive windfallprices for their to 'a class in emergence' Ley'sreference was homes'(Ley,1981,p. 138,emphases thesis as thepost-industrial andhe notedthat ant, added). it was not locationally is quiteclear. The causalprimacy developed by sociologists Leysees property as stimulated specific.But he argued that 'these traitsare not activity by the market power of the thereis a geographyof the growing distributed; whichis a product uniformly whitecollarlabourforce, structure. society... it mightfitcircumstances of changesin economicand employment post-industrial more closely in San Franciscoor London than in He has reiterated thisview in a morerecent (1986) ClevelandorGlasgow'(Ley,1980,pp. 242-3). Thisis paper.As he putit: a key pointwhichhas an important bearingon the and Ley is found of where gentrification question ofdowntown (in)thewhite-collar job growth complex thesis to the to Vancouver, looking apply proceeded andindirectly, headoffices, services, (in) public producer at changes in industrial, leadsto andagencies in... nodal occupationaland demoinstitutions centres... and inner and in thelifestyles and other of professionals, the'production' structures city graphic managers who then had occurred. which downtown, market Ley did not working employees housing quaternary in re-investment basefor thedemand inthis refer housing provide to theterm paper, gentrification explicitly it and as this the inner ... a link city gives made clear political in he population, betweenthegrowth but 1981 to urban to itsownpredeliction economic expression of and quaternary ofthetertiary thegrowth sectors, will restructure the built environment and amenity, and managerial changesin occupations, professional accelerate the 1986, 532). (Ley, gentrification process p. and of housingdemandin Vancouver the structure As he putit: gentrification. it is possible to follow thetransmission of largescale AN ASSESSMENT OF LEY'S THEORY OF of inthe tothe jobcreation POST-INDUSTRIAL URBANISM adjustments economy pattern white collar in Vancouver, withtrends job favouring Thereis muchin Ley's thesisthatMarxistanalysts district. These contextual in thecentral business growth would stronglychallenge,not least the political in the metrothe behind lie factors changes demographic which emphasishe accords to a new elite of tastemakers demand areaand thehousing pressures politan and of culture the importance them 128 1981, added). and opinionformers, accompanied (Ley, p. emphases his acceptanceof the idea of postconsumption, and Greenberg, are locationally industrialism 1982),and his (Walker Butthesehousingdemandpressures of the built of number of small, the the seemingrelegation production Discussing growing specific. and nineteenth-century notions of on environment impact young,highincomehouseholdsand their roleinurban affairs. cultural labourand capitalto a secondary that market, theinner Leyargued city housing an autonomous of 'The neighbourhoods are important: them- ButLeywas notadvocating factors theory urban developmentand a measure oflife-style, andarchi- consumption-determined selvesinclude ethnic consumerpreference of middle-class change,or a straightforward valued attributes tectural diversity, as some of his critics have of the theoryof gentrification moversto thecentral city... thesedesiderata and nordoes hisworkrestjuston Bell'sconshould ofconsumption notbe under-estimated argued, culture in interpreting of the innercity' ceptof thepost-industrial the the revitalization city.On thecontrary, in he accordsto culture and consumption (Ley,1981,p. 128). importance and operation the post-industrial city are clearlyrooted in the Ley had less to say on thestructure of production, landand housing and thesupply and deeper changes in the structure ofurban the market and areas and, changing division of labour, and the rise of a of gentrifiable properties production concentrated service wherehe does, it is more focusedon the demand locationally class. of noted role of real While this class the the that the Leyargues Ley equation. aspects playeda keyrolein andculture, he also identified of estate industry, but he accorded it a secondaryor politics itas a product roleinthegentrification oflabourand thespatially reinforcing process. Referring thechangesinthedivision oftheinner cityareaofKitsilano, uneven nature of these changes. He thus linked to therevitalization of together changes in the organization of prohe states 'Thereis little doubtthat that: theactivity addedto theinstability of the duction and theeconomy, intoan andculture, therealestateindustry politics

178

CHRIS HAMNETT

andurban Inhisview,theactionsofproducers as to gentrification approach changebased on contradictory. ofgentrifiers andtheir charac- well as consumers need to be takenintoaccountin theproduction cultural and requirements. As he put teristics Withoutthis,he would explaining thegentrification phenomenon. havebeenguilty ofadvocating a non-materialist, con- it:'To explaingentrification to thegentriaccording ofgentrification as hiscritics fier's actions alone,whileignoring theroleofbuilders, theory sumption-based, have suggested. But,inmyview,theyhave misinter- developers,landlords,mortgage lenders,governas a ment agencies, real estate agents and tenantsis pretedhis stresson cultureand consumption narrow demand andpreference-based A broadertheory narrow. of gentrificawhen, excessively approach in fact, itis based on changesin thesocialand spatial tion must take the role of producersas well as divisionof labour and on the supply of potential consumers intoaccount'(Smith, 1979,p. 540). These changesunderpin thedevelopment Smithis entirely correct in thisrespect, and this gentrifiers. of a new cultureand the residential and political is somethingthat Ley largely failed to do. But demands thatfollowfrom it. what Smiththenproceededto do was to argue for dominance: it can be producer Lookingat Ley's earlyworkin general, itsstrength liesinitsfocus on thechanges arguedthat in the social and spatialdivisionsof labour, and the - inparticular itappears that the needs ofproduction the ina limited number of'post-industrial', need - area more decisive initiative behind concentration toearn profit than consumer Thisis notto service-dominated of a professional and mancities, gentrification preference. in some is theautothat naive a elite. He accords considerable say way consumption stress to the agerial matic ofproduction, orthat consumer prefconsequence role of changesin culture and consumption and the erence is a totally effect caused byproduction. passive or demands ofthenew elite, residential requirements Such would be a producer's almost theory, sovereignty but he locates thisin the contextof changesin the as one-sided as itsneo-classical the Rather, counterpart. nature and structure ofeconomicorganization. Ley's between and consumption is symbirelationship production thesisis strongest in theexplanation of the it offers in whichproduction dominates. otic,but it is a symbiosis is likely to occur, typeofcityin whichgentrification in initiating the Althoughit is of secondary importance and the characteristics of the gentrifiers. It also inexplaining actual andtherefore why process, gentrifideals with the timingof gentrification cation in thefirst occurred consumer implicitly place, preference indetermining anddemand areofprimary itsanalysis ofthegrowth oftheservice econimportance through form ofrevitalized thefinal andcharacter areas(Smith, is in omyin the1970s and 1980s.Whereitis weaker added). p. 540emphases its explanation of the areas in whichgentrification 1979, which as a product ofdemand occurs, Leyseeslargely concluded that: forinner and cultural Smith citylocationsand theamenity facilities offer to the The of they gentrifiers. supply housesis assumedto followon The so-called urban renaissance has been stimulated gentrifiable potential Inthe more than forces. decision fromthe demandsand market cultural to byeconomic power of potential inner oneconsumer rehabilitate structure, to outbidotherusers.But Ley's stresson city preference gentrifiers - the for tostand outabovetheothers preference the market tends power of the new elitesuggeststhathe more a financial sound or, investment. accurately profit, sees thepowerto outbid other usersas a majordeterornotgentrifiers this itis articulate preference, minant of theurbanlandscape: as important Whether perhaps for few would evenconsider rehabilitation fundamental, as thenew elite'sculture ofconsumption. A theory a financial ofgentrilosswere if tobeexpected. fication musttherefore whysomeneighbourexplain while arenot? hoodsareprofitable others to redevelop THE SUPPLY-SIDE ANALYSIS: What of Consumer are conditions the profitability? GENTRIFICATION AND THE 'RENT-GAP' tookforgranted theavailsovereignty explanations of areasripeforgentrification whenthiswas of gentrification ability Ley's approachto the explanation what had to be explained 1979, (Smith, theproduction ofgentrifiers andtheir cultural stressed precisely 540-1). pp. element. The andconsumption as its requirements key and theoperation of supplyofgentrifiable properties of the wereaccordeda Smith thenproceededto lay out his theory theurbanlandand housingmarkets I do and reversed this rentgap. This is by now verywell known, role.Smith (1979) completely secondary infull. to detailhisargument Suffice to say explanatory emphasis,arguingthat the 'consumer notintend of shifts itlocatesgentrification were takenforgrantedand that within long-term preference' arguments

and the Theblind men elephant

179

This is an elegant argument, and Smithwas quite correct to attempt to shift the emphasisaway from and demand arguthe early consumerpreference towardsa consideration of thesupplyof genments and the role of mortgagefinance trifiable property and profitability. Butit is now clearthat, despitethe ofhisrent an understanding for importance gap thesis of theunevenpattern of investment, disinvestment and reinvestment in thebuiltenvironment, his rejection of alternative explanatory approaches,particularlytherole of the new class,and its consumption and cultural and his unwillingness to characteristics, accordindividual actorsanysignificant rolerendered his initialapproach of only limitedvalue for the Oncethe rent be may gapiswideenough, gentrification In Smith's of indithesis, ina given initiated differentexplanation gentrification. byseveral neighbourhood vidualgentrifiers aremerely thepassivehandmaidens inthe actors land andhousing market. Andhere wecome requirements. backto therelationship between andcon- ofcapital's production is withSmith's rejection for the evidence sumption, empirical suggests strongly The logicalplace to start demand and Ley'spost-industrial that theprocess is initiated notbytheexercise ofthose ofconsumer theory individual consumer much beloved ofneo- thesis.Smithacknowledgedthat only Ley's postpreferences classical but by someform of collective industrial thesis is broadenoughto accountforgeneconomists, socialaction at theneighbourhood level(Smith, 1979, trification buthe rejected it as being internationally, added). p. 545emphasis If individualpreferences contradictory. change in cannotbe individual or the unison, they preferences Smith'soppositionto any explanationof gentrificonstraints are strongenough to force overriding cationbased on individual consumer is preferences intothesamemould.Thereis sometruth them in the clearcut, andreferring ofmortgage to theimportance second argument.Consumer preferences do not in thisprocess, he arguesthat: funding emerge out of thin air. They are partlysocially andshaped, andthey arenecesscreated, All theconsumer in the world will come to manipulated preference unless thislongabsent source of funding re- arilymade on thebasis of theavailableoptionsand nought is a prerequisite. Of course, constraints and notalwaysin thecircumstances ofan appears; mortgage capital this must be borrowed con- individual's own choosing. bywilling mortage capital WhereSmith is wrongis sumers some oranother. But these in exercising preference arguingthat,forthe conceptof individual prefare not prerequisites sincetheycan be erenceto be valid,individuals preferences in different countries created 1979, (Smith, socially pp.545-6). mustmakedifferent choices.Ifsimilar groupsin different countries arefacing similar at thesame options Smith summarizes his thesis as follows: itis scarcely that there time, maybe similar surprising Butthis does notmeanthat individuals are is a structural of thelandand outcomes. 'gentrification product in theirchoices as Smith(1979, markets. flows where the rate ofreturn is totallydetermined housing Capital and themovement of capital to thesuburbs p. 540) seemsto imply, or thatall 'preferences are ... highest, thecontinual ofinner alongwith city depreciation capi- sociallycreated'.

in the builtenvironand disinvestment investment and focuseson the relationship betweenland ment, on theway inwhich and property value,particularly of capitalredisinvestment producesthe possibility cenSmith investment. arguesthatin thenineteenth a had classical land value most cities tury, gradient, andfalling towards the at thecentre gradually highest ofindustry as thesuburbanization and But, periphery. the turnof the century populationproceededfrom fell relative tothe landvaluesintheinner onwards, city and a 'valley'in thelandvalue CBD and thesuburbs duringthe gradientopened up which intensified in 1940s, 50s decades of sustainedsuburbanization and60s. Thisdevalorization oftheinner city provided thebasisforsubsequent reinvestment. profitable is therelationship land The keyfor Smith, between of the value and property value.When depreciation has proceeded farenough, the existingstructures wherethecapitalized of groundrent pointis reached site or neighbourhoodis less than its potential and best use'. This is the groundrentin its 'highest rentgap, and accordingto Smith, or gentrification can occur when the gap is wide redevelopment, a profit. enoughto ensure

therent tal,eventually gap produces gap. Whenthis that rehabilitation matter, (orfor sufficiently grows large, ofreturn canbegin tochallenge the rates availrenewal) able elsewhere and capital flows back'(Smith, 1979, p. 546). of Smith's Hence,the subtitle paper:'A back to the notpeople'. citymovement by capital, AN ASSESSMENT OF SMITH'S RENT GAP THEORY OF GENTRIFICATION

180

CHRIS HAMNETT

Smith's solution is to redefine in terms correct(see Moore, 1982) to argue that:'the propreference of 'collectivesocial preference', but this does not cess is not initiated by the exerciseof individual come consumer ... but by some form of colexplain where collective social preferences preferences from.All it does is to displace the problem of lective social action at the neighbourhood level' the originsof preference dismiss explaining up the scale to (p. 545). Smith'stendencyto consistently a more ideologically acceptable, if theoretically the role of individual in favourof colgentrifiers level. It should also be stressedthat lective social actors is clearly seen where he mysterious of people decideto live in theinner identifies threetypes of developerswho typically onlya minority and become more decide to in city Many gentrifiers. They are: operate gentrifying neighbourhoods. move out to the suburbs. There remains, therefore, whopurchase re(a) professional developers property, of explaining theproblem why some people do one itandresell for (b) occupier develop profit; developers thing, and some do another. This cannot be who buyand redevelop and inhabit it after property explainedin termsof capital flows,disinvestment completion; who rentit to (c) landlord developers and reinvestment. tenants after Thefragmented rehabilitation.... structure Althoughthe gentrification process does involve capital flows,it also involves of... ownership hasmadetheoccupier who developer, an inefficient in theconstruction is generally operator people, and this is Achillesheel of Smith'ssupply into an appropriate vehiclefor recycling side thesis. industry devalued 1979, (Smith, neighbourhoods p.546). Not onlydoes Smith consumer relegate preference and demandto a subsidary rolein favour of theproWhat Smithis arguing is that, to all his contrary of residential duction space,he arguesthatthefocus other assertions on thecentral of importance producer of a theoryof gentrification must be one of the andthesecondary is roleofconsumer interests, choice, reasonswhysome neighbourhoods are profitable to thattheindividual households are themselves one of are not.Smith is correct that themost redevelopwhileothers in and indeed, forces important appropriate consumer sovereignty/demand-led explanations theproduction ofgentrified Only by neighbourhoods. of areas ripe for took for grantedthe availability isheabletocircumvent them as developers classifying fell into as we shall Smith But, see, gentrification. thisawkwardintrusion of individual renovation for an almostidentical trapby takingforgrantedthe into his thesis. To producer-dominated of consumption andtheconditions existence ofa pool ofgentrifiers theextent thatindividual producers/consumers play iftheconditions ofprofitademand. He assumedthat a key role in the gentrification (and thisis process thatgentrification werefavourable (or,forthat bility inLondon), true Smith's distinction between certainly thepotenwouldtakeplaceand that matter, renewal) an is artificial one andhe and consumption tial gentrifiers were on hand to play a role in the production fails to explain wheretheindividual gentrideveloper to fiers revalorization process.Only laterdid he attempt or why some individuals become come from, to thislacuna, itself a product ofhis tendency rectify In others do not. Smith's while analysis assume thatdemandwas of secondaryimportance gentrifiers, because of the value individuals seem to gentrify to supplyin theexplanation ofgentrification. tastes and of theircharacteristics, in arguingforthe centrality of gap, irrespective Smithis correct out: butas Rose (1984) perceptively demands, points as inurban residential finance restructuring mortgage ofa process deterarenotthemere bearers gentrifiers (1976; 1978),Boddy(1976), Harvey(1974),Williams ceras of Their them. mined constitution, and et Hamnett independently Wolfe al. (1980), Dingemans(1979), an is as crucial and as people, taintypes of workers, also But have shown. (1986; 1987) Randolph as is the in of the element progentrification production finance renders absenceofmortgage gentrialthough ofthe ormay duction They they may occupy. dwellings itspresence on allbuta smallscale, fication impossible in particular not makethepotential happen process creategentrification. does not, of itself, Mortgage situations 1984, (Rose, p.56). contingent of condition butnota sufficient finance is a necessary of is a powerfulindictment Rose's statement Nor is itadequatefor Smith large-scale gentrification. of the character and deterministic to argue that although'mortgagecapital mustbe the economistic with its overridborrowed by willing consumersexercisingsome rentgap theoryof gentrification areas. of gentrifiable can be socially ing stresson the production or another ... preferences preference that cannot be too It but created' (Smith1979, p. 546). This is correct, gentrifistrongly emphasized of individual are sociallycreated cation does not occur independently thatall preferences Smith implies therentgap maybe necessary which is nonsensical. Nor is it empirically gentrifiers. Although

men Theblind andthe elephant

181

histories areessential tothe their ownhousing, It does it is not sufficient. to occur, forgentrification particular unfold ina place'(Clark, which 1988, p. 244). willtakeplace. Inthatgentrification not necessitate aboutwhygentrideed,rent saysnothing gap theory Badcock (1989) in his studyof Adelaide,South form Australia than someother fication shouldtakeplacerather evidencethata sizeable foundconvincing of rent The rent or redevelopment. ofrenewal gap theory gap had developedby 1970 in the Cityand in under-determined.someofthe is thussubstantially gentrification suburbs Victorian residential surrounding is not 'to be expected'wheretherent and thatsubstantial Gentrification had subsequently gentrification Gentrifica- occurredwhichfilledin the rent itis a contingent phenomenon. gap exists; gap. But he also deterioration concluded tioncould occurbut so could renewal, for this rent that'theprocesses responsible or abandonment. as near as Smith are nowhere straightforward gap And given that the gap between potentialand would have it' (Badcock,1989, 132). He argued p. on the existence that actual groundrentsis predicated ofcapiwas thethird bestresponse gentrification of potentialground rent,Smith says very little tal to in Adelaide,and was, in existingconditions about the processes by which such potential some ways a sub-optimalinvestmentstrategy ground rentscome into existence.It is possible, (p. 133). In otherwords,gentrification was not an forexample,thatin gentrifying areas,the potential inevitable outcomeoftherent gap. ground rent is, in part,a resultof demand from It is clearfrom thesetwo studies thattheexistence (Moore, 1982). As Munt (1987) ofa rent gentrifiers potential forgentrificondition gap is not a sufficient can afford numerous inner-city cationto occur.On the contrary, argues:'As gentrifiers of a the existence itfollows that thesizeoftherent rent residential locations, results gap can lead to a varietyof different attractivelocations dependson their gap inparticular or further decline.More includingredevelopment ness, and hence on demand,whichis absent from generally, is of value it appearsthatSmith's theory Marxist gentrification theory'(p. 1177). Ley goes insofar as it explainsthe existenceof areas within further to argue that the rent gap is not even a cities where may take place. It says gentrification In his view, all necessaryelementof gentrification. about why gentrification tendsto occurin nothing forprofit and the somecities thatis necessaryis the potential rather thanothers, or aboutthecharacterto outbidexisting or potential isticsand abilityof gentrifiers and themselves, originsof the gentrifiers users fordesirableinnercitysites.Ley also argues an rather than suburbanized. As whytheygentrified that most developersare riskaverse and will not and disinvestanalysisof the cycles of investment an area untildemandis proven.'From mentin the built environment riskentering it remainsa major the developerspoint of view, demand is the bot- contribution, but its role in explaining otheraspects tom line. In shortcapital followsdemand,though of is limited. gentrification this is not to say that local marketscannot be The principalreason why Smith'stheorywas or that demand is unable to address these other e.g., blockbusting manipulated questionswas that, produced by broader economic contexts' (1990, givenitsfocuson theproduction ofthebuilt environpersonalcommunication). of prement,it was 'limitedto the specification These problems withtherent havebeen conditions gap thesis fortheproduction ofgentrified dwellings documentedin two recentempirical studies.Clark without the production of 'gentrifiers', considering clear ofa rent evidence (1988) found gapinhispioneer- theoccupants of suchdwellings' (Rose, 1984, p. 51). ing analysisof the evolutionof land and property BecauseSmith focused hisexplanation on theproducvalues in Malmo,Sweden,buthe arguedthatit was tionof the rent and dismissed as gap, and conflated in terms of Marshall's theoretically explicableeither in structure, changes 'preferences', occupational neo-classicalformulation or in terms of Smith's andreproductive he ignored behaviour, demographic Marxistone,and thattherent gap was in no sensea key material the production of changesinfluencing determinant of gentrification or a completeexplaand equatedmaterialist with gentrifiers, explanations nation rather than for it.Infact gentrifi- therent redevelopment gap. cation occurredin all cases in Malmo. Clark thus theidea of: rejected THE PRODUCTION OF GENTRIFIERS AND somepredetermined withthe'needsof THEIR LOCATIONAL CHOICES development as prime mover and therent-gap as time-set capital' theroleof mechanism. Theaction ofagents with econ- In theearly1980s, Ley's thesisregarding triggering omic orpolitical andofindividuals in changes interested interests, inthesocialandspatial division oflabour and

182

CHRIS HAMNETT

in occupationalstructure theoretical and empirical workby Marxists has been and the rise of a 'new with those ofgentrifimiddle class' and the links to gentrification exclusively was preoccupied aspects cation which canbe directly related to theoperation of paralleled in different ways by several other thelaw ofvaluein thebuilt environment ofcapitalist workers who made theoretical links between cities .... This hascreated notonly ananalytical gapbut of changes in the social and spatial restructuring alsoanepistemological error ofconsiderable importance labour processes,corporateorganization and what (Rose, 1984, p.52). Rose (1984) termedthe production of gentrifiers. One such link was made by Mullins (1982) who She arguesthatitis essential to move beyondthis argued that dramaticchanges had taken place in verylimited to between conception explorethelinks the Australian innercity.The declineof innercity and changesin the social and spatial gentrification and the skilledworkingclass resimanufacturing of labour processes and the reprorestructuring dent population had been accompanied by the duction oflabour havebeen powerandpeople,which emergence of corporate centres for monopoly largely which see byeconomistic ignored approaches and middleclass office workers. Mullins social capitalism as either derivable from theeconomic processes linkedthis to gentrification, arguingthat 'whereas or epiphenomenal. (1986) has similarly Beauregard the workingclass of an earlierformof innercity alone a totally is arguedthattherent gap inadequate reasonscentred lived therebecause of employment 'The explanationfor explanationof gentrification. on manufacturing "educated labour" is industry, gentrification begins with the presenceof "gentricomingto residein the innercity(for)uniquecon- fiers", the necessary of the agentsand beneficiaries reasons'(p. 45-6). But,as Mullinsnoted: sumption takenby gentrification process,and the directions 'the development of officeemploymentcannot their and consumption' reproduction (Beauregard, increaseof inner whollyexplainthe residential city 1986,p. 41). educated labour simplybecause the bulk of these His argument involved three key components. workers ... residein the suburbs and commute .... First,that the demand for inexpensive, inner-city Other processes must have been involved in this is nota newphenomenon andcannotsimply housing residential development'(Mullins,1982, p. 53). A be explained that'the by therent gengap. Secondly, similar linkwas also made by Moore (1982, p. 1) areoften, seldom the"agents" alone, trifiers though ofthe who argued that'gentrification the prorepresents and thusprovide themotivations gentrification process, cess whereby an important ofthenew classis and fraction that thatwithout aspirations shapeit',and thirdly, a residential concomitant with this identity establishing the ceases to exist. Different group process types its social identity, with the overall contextof the of be rehabilitated, but as characterhousingmight central citybecomingmoreand morea whitecollar istics ofgentrifiers arebroadly similar acrossa variety city'. ofdifferent isdefined areas,'gentrification bythe presence Mullinspointedto thekeyroleofproduction and of gentrifiers' (Beauregard,1986, p. 41 emphases ofparticular leisure-orientated artsser- added). consumption vices within the inner whichare producedand city, This is an argument at odds withthat radically put consumed of educatedworkers. forward Smith. number by a limited The causal is exactlythe by primacy This explanation forgentrification, whichis linked reverse.Whereas Smithassumed the existenceof to the production of gentrifiers and to their cultural and saw the productionof potential gentrifiers, is similar to Ley'sthesis, and identifies a requirements areas as the keytotheprocess, appropriate Beauregard reasonforthelocational concentration ofthe identifies specific as thekeyto explaining theprogentrifiers new class in theinner cities:their cultural needs and cess.Gentrification without does notexist. gentrifiers theconcentration ofcultural facilities. The locational Like to thecrucial LeyandMullins, Beauregard points of is crucial What Mullins role question importance. and occuplayed by the changesin industrial ofa new middle realized was thatthegrowth classor and suggeststhatit is within the pationalstructure, classis necessary, butnotsufficient service to explain 'urban fraction of labor and managerial professional A sufficient gentrification. explanationmust also thatgentrifiers are situated'. And like Rose (1984), for intheinner Mullins(1982), Moore (1982) and Williams(1984), account whysomeofthis groupreside thanelsewhere (see also Moore, 1982). cityrather Beauregard arguesthat: The argument thekey role of the proregarding ductionof potentialgentrifiers was developed by In order to explain andmanwhythese professionals within thecityand also engagein Rose (1984) who arguedthat: agers... remain

Theblind men and the elephant

183

more thesphere we must of awayfrom gentrification andconandfocus upontheir production reproduction activities resi.... Whatis itaboutan urban sumption to work, whichis to proximity dence,in addition withthereproduction and conespecially compatible activities of thisfraction of labour? (1986, sumption p.43). concludes that: by arguing Beauregard

the fact transformation. ofurban Given the movement of into theurban andtheemphasis on execucore, capital administrative and managerial functive, professional, aswell asother the tions, activities, support demographic andlifestyle ... helpto explain whywe have changes bars rather than Howard Johnstons, proliferating quiche clothes andgourmet food rather trendy boutiques shops than corner stores' 1986, (Smith, p.31).

This view represents the totalmarginalization of to therent the thecolourand designof one only of necessary consumption' influencing gap argument provides andnone the ones .... theicingon thecakeofurbanrestructuring conditions and genfor of sufficient gentrification in trification. haverent cities Manyareasof central It ignoresthe arguments gaps greatly by put forward ofthose areas that Thusthe can- Moore, excess theory gentrify. and Ley regarding the importBeauregard noteasily Hoboken...becomes why gentrified, explain ance of culture in explaining and consumption why butNewark ... doesnot(1986, added). thenewclass p.39 emphases theinner than move cityrather gentrify out to the suburbs. While Smithaccepts thatit is Thisisa crucial which weakens Smith's greatly point to explaintheroleofchangesin thestrucimportant To sumup,itisclear that ofa pool claims. theexistence tureof production and thechanging spatialdivision ofnewmiddle classpotential is a necessary gentrifiers of labourin producing and managerial professional forgentrification to takeplace.So is the pre-requisite workers intheinner he fails to address thereason city, existence of a stockof potentially areas gentrifiable a fraction of this should locateintheinner group and houses. But neither of these are sufficient for why And whenhe discusses theroleofgentrifiers he a fragment to occur. Thatrequires ofthe city. gentrification dismisses idea thattheymight a resolutely any play and managerial expanded professional group who crucial rolein theprocess: wishto live in theinner of areas,and a concentration Without appropriatefacilitiesand environments. as with theoriginal themythology hasitthat frontier, these prerequisites, it is highlyunlikely that genisa process ledbyindividual and gentrification pioneers will occurnotwithstanding the actionsof homesteaders whose sweat andvision trification are equity, daring ofmortgage the those and theavailability finance. uswhoaremore timid. wayfor paving among developers But... itisapparent that where urban venture, pioneers the real estate the state orother collecbanks, companies SMITH'S ATTEMPT TO INTEGRATE tive economic actors have (Smith, generally gonebefore CONSUMPTION INTO GENTRIFICATION 1986, pp.18-19). In 1986 Smith to locatetherent attempted gap thesis within a wider analysis of gentrification which includedthe de-industrialization of capitalist economiesandthegrowth ofwhite collar and employment, and consumption changesin demography patterns. This appearedto heralda significant of his widening and Smithnoted that'althoughprevious approach, at explanation have tendedto fasten on one attempts or theothertrend, theymay not in factbe mutually exclusive but concession, (p. 21). Thisis an important view regretably remained Smith's firmly production and cultural based, viewingdemographic processes as epiphenomenon or surface froth. As he revealingly putit: But thisis not borneout by evidencefrom London and New York (Zukin,1987) whichindicatesthat individual role even if pioneersdo play a key initial overtaken realestate theymaybe often by thebanks, and Munt (1987) agents developers. arguedthatin Battersea, London,'a gradualprocessof infiltration ... preceeded by gentrifiers any largescale development'(p. 1177). Contrary to Smith, thereis a strong case that where the collective economic actors venture,urban pioneers have often gone before (Goetze,1979). In 1987 in a majorpaperentitled 'Of yuppiesand social restructuring and the housing:gentrification, urbandream',Smithattempted to tacklethe social and head on. arguments in demographic and life-style changes patterns pref- restructuring consumption at first the evidence for the existence ofa 'new Looking erences arenotcompletely but ... the irrelevant, importacceptedthattherehas been an anceof demographic and life-style issuesseemsto be middleclass',Smith inthe determination with 'proofthe surface form taken chiefly by undeniableoccupationaltransformation, much oftheurban rather than and upperlevel administrative restructuring explaining fessional, managerial

184

CHRIS HAMNETT

in expandingsectorsheavilyrepresented personnel (Smith,1987a, p. 154), but he among gentrifiers' this does notprovetheexistence ofa new arguedthat middle classinMarxist terms to owner(i.e.inrelation of themeansofproduction). Thisis shipand control but as the social restructuring thesisis pricorrect, concerned with marily occupation changeandnotthe theoretical ofMarxist classcategories, thisis validity and Smithappears to accept the largelyirrelevant existence of a new 'class' in empirical terms ifnot in terms ofMarxist classtheory. As he putsit:

Thereis no doubt thatemployment structure has andthat a profound social restrucdramatically changed istaking itisaltering... the class Therecan be little doubtthata continued and even turing place... andthat ofsociety. this social centralization of administrative, configuration executive, Equally, restructuring accelerated isheavily inthe andsome service activities (Smith, professional, implicated gentrification process managerial may a central make 1987a, p. 161). domicile more desirable a substantial for sector ofthe middle class. Butdo these really arguments amount to an explanation ofthegeographical reversal But while Smithacceptedthe 'overarching importof thelocation habits ofmiddle-class by a proportion for ance' of the new work on social restructuring men ... the andwomen? that social restructurargument he arguedthat: explaining gentrification behindgentrification is ing is the primary impetus underdetermined 1987a, (Smith, substantially p. 164). also bring certain intrinsic withthem. they If dangers istobeexplained and as the result Smith gentrification first foremost is correct inarguing thatsocialrestructuring social itbecomes aloneis notan ... then ofthe emergence ofa new group ofgentrification. adequate explanation toavoid at least a tacit tosome sort difficult subscription of But,as we have seen,the of the social proponents consumer no matter howwatered down. model, preference thesis do not that it is. On the restructuring argue Howelsedoesthis newsocial about group bring gentriall to crucial role of the the contrary, they point fication kinds andlocations bydemanding except specifc cultural and consumption of a in themarket' requirements ofhousing 1987a,p. 163 added specific (Smith, of the new and that are class, they met fragment argue emphases). location. Thereisa causallink between byaninner city theproduction ofa new professional and managerial Smith'sfearsare very clear,and they shape his labourforce, thecultural and consumption characterto resolvehisproblem ofaccepting theexistattempt ofpart istics ofthat andthecreation ofpotential group, enceofa newsocialgroupwithout a them key giving Thereare two stepsto theargument, not gentrifiers. role in the gentrification process.His 'solution'is one, but Smith the first and disonly acknowledges what is perhapsthe key ingeneousand highlights missesthesecond.Not surprisingly, Smith concludes in theexplanation of gentrification: namely that: problem itsspatialmanifestation. He states: I would the ... not as initself a defend analysis rent-gap - and There isnoargument but that canattimes demand orcomplete but as the centernecessary definitive explanation those times when demand dramati- pieceto any theory especially changes It is the historical of gentrification. - alter thenature ofproduction. But the conundrum cally ofcapital anddisinvestment inthe investment patterns doesnotturn onexplaining where middle central ofgentrification andinner cities establishes that theopporcity class demand comes itturns onexplaining the Rather, from. inthe for this reversal (notthenecessity) tunity spatial central andinner first (Smith, essentially ofwhy geographical question 1987a, added). place p. 165emphases areas which decades could not the demands cities, of for satisfy nowappear to do so handsomely. class, If, ofthemiddle a substantial retreat from represents demand structures havechanged, we needto This statement indeed, Smith's initial and what Badcock position, presupposes a these demands have led to why explain spatial changed 'a considerable relaxation of on thecentral andinner 1987a, (1989,p. 126)has termed (Smith, city re-emphasis thetheory's Smith now seems original added). assumptions'. pp.163-4emphases

Smith'sargument is a fascinating one. Having the acceptedthatdemandcan play a role in altering nature ofproduction, hethen avoidstheconsequences of thisadmission thattheconundrum of by arguing does notturn on wheredemandcomes gentrification buton whyittakesthelocational form it does. from, This questionis fundamental fortheexplanation of But it is only halftheissue.The congentrification. undrumof gentrification turnson boththe explanation ofwheremiddle classdemandcomesfrom and on its manifestation in the central and innercities. Smith howeveridentifies the secondquestionas the keyone. He arguesthat:

Theblind men and theelephant

185

more process. Butsuchdifferences that Smith to view therentgap as a key whichtranslates aside,thefact had to undertake this is indicative of of the i.e. gentrifiers reinterpretation generalprocesses, production ButSmith's thatthe thelimitations oftherent ofgentrification intoa spatialreversal. argument gap theory of and Smith'sfundamental to concede to anytheory rent unwillingness centrepiece gap is thenecessary that individuals have role is too a claim. As Smith out, any significant in shaping points gentrification large not the theirenvironment. Yet the closestSmithcan bring the rentgap establishesthe opportunity, to go is to accepttheroleof collective social for a spatialreversal to occur.The rent necessity, gap himself of differenmay providethe means,but it does not providea actors and the functional requirements innewmodeofregulation. Itisnot Forthis, for we needtolookinto tiated motive gentrification. consumption refuses to grantindividual the heartof darkness: what is, forSmith, locational thatSmith agencydomi- butthat nance- this isnottheargument he seemsto and consumption. lifestyles preferences, at other than a on refuse to it even exists finds individual GiventhatSmith anyemphasis anything accept in 1987 he superficial to anyform ofagency level.His opposition lifestylesand consumption unacceptable; forwhom a way oftrying to integrate revealshimas a structuralist outlined production-side explanation and consumption-side agencyis reducedto theroleof flickering arguments vis-a-visgentrifi- individual ofcapital'sfire. cationin terms of a historical analysisof societalre- shadowscastby thelight This entailed rejectionof Ley's ideas structuring. about post-industrialism as a 'shallow empirical abstraction ... incapable of sustainingtheoretical TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED THEORY OF 1987a, p. 166) whilereinterpretingGENTRIFICATION (Smith, scrutiny' of the consumption the substance societyargument in terms ofthe'regulationist' ofAglietta. Itis It has been arguedthatboththesocial restructuring analysis that as the intensive of accumulation thesisassociatedwith Ley and the rentgap thesis argued regime at the edges in the 1970s and 1980s, advanced by Smithare partialattempts to explain began to fray there has been a switch towardsa new (post-Fordist) gentrification. Ley'sapproachfocusedon changesin ofaccumulation associated notwith masspro- the social and spatialdivisonof labour,changesin regime duction and consumption, but with differentiatedoccupationalstructure, the creationof cultural and and consumption. In thisnew regimeof environmental demandsand theirtransmission into production theaccentis on product-differentiation thehousing market via thegreater accumulation, purchasing power andniche markets. Gentrification is explained inthese of the new class. He largelytook forgrantedthe terms as a result ofthedesire ofgentrifiers to differen- existence ofpotential areassuitable for gentrification tiatethemselves from othersocial groups.As Smith and saw the processprimarily in terms of housing notes: market demand. on theother Smith handfocused on the production of gentrifiable the housingthrough It is thisquestion in a mass mechanism of cultural differentiation of therentgap. He tookforgranted the market which ismost relevant togentrification. Gentrifi-existenceof a of potentialgentrifiers and supply cationis a redifferentiation of thecultural socialand the of a ofthenewclass economic ... gentrification andthemodeof ignored question why segment landscape to locate in the innercity.Mullins,Moore, opted it engenders arean integral ofclass consumption part andRose arguedthat an understanding of arepart of themeans constitution; they by Beauregard employed ofgentrifiers and their socialand culnewmiddle classindividuals to distinguish themselves theproduction was of crucial foran from the... bourgeoise above and theworking class turalcharacteristics importance of gentrification. below(Smith, 1987, They developed understanding pp.167-8). and arguedthatgentrifiers Ley's thesisconsiderably What Smith has done is to reinterpret, in terms of are centralto the gentrification process. Without theory, Ley's work on post-industrial them,the process cannotoccurat all. But gentrifiregulationist of con- cationis notsimply a product ofchanges in thesocial consumption.But Smith's interpretation and itsrolein gentrification is clearly oflabour, crucial thishas very and spatialdivision sumption though different from thatsuggestedby Ley and others. locationalorientation towardsthe By been. A specific the importance of consumption within the inner it,is also stressing cityor specific housingareas within of capitalaccumulation framework he attempted to necessaryand a supply of gentrifiable areas and circumvent thetheoretical ingiving housing inherent defined notjustinterms oftheexistence ofa dangers individual a key role in thegentrificationrentgap, but also in terms of relative or gentrifiers desirability

186

CHRIS HAMNETT

of labourwhichhave led to deattractiveness to the potentialgentrifiers (Munt, and spatialdivisions of advanced capitalisteconomies industrialization 1987,pp. 1195-6). has There are fourrequirements forgentrification to and thegrowth oftheservice sector. This,inturn, of theprooccuron a significant scale. The first threeare con- been associatedwiththerapidexpansion ofsuitable areas fessional serviceclass,and the conwiththesupply and managerial cerned, respectively, forgentrification, of thesupplyof potential centration financial, key legal and otherfunctions gentrifiers, and theexistence of attractive central and inner smallnumber of majorcitiessuch as city in a relatively of environments. the necessary They comprise supply London and New York and Parisand a number side elements of theequation.The final other cities such as Vancouver, Toronto, major requirement for It is in these citiesthat involvesa cultural inner cityresidence Sydneyand San Francisco. preference has beenmostmarked. oftheservice class.Itis therefore gentrification bya certain segment musttherefore The explanation forgentrification possibleto conceiveofa rangeofpossibleoutcomes for on the combination of these four elements. with the begin processesresponsible theproducdepending oftheservice ofkeyfractions The range of outcomesare shown in Table I. The tionand concentration of major cities.These processes the schemais that class in a number important pointto emergefrom and of have producedthepool of potential onlyoccursunderone combination gentrifiers, gentrification of mustbe on theexplanation None oftheother combinations leadto theprimary circumstances. emphasis itcould the expansionof thiskey group.This is nota conLeywouldarguethat although gentrification, It is firmly based in the a rent based explanation. occurwithout gap as longas thenewclasshave sumption in of and to or other land the structure thepurchasing changes production thesocial power displace replace and spatialdivisionof labourin advancedcapitalist users. to explain countries. Itis then TABLE I. Conditions schema necessary whygentrififor gentrification insomeofthesecities. As we have seen, cationoccurs to it is necessary are necessary. two conditions First, No Rent Rent innercity have a supplyof potentially gentrifiable gap exists gap exists This is whererentgap theorycomes in, property. ofdevaluedinner citypropwhya supply explaining No gentrificationNo gentrification No potential and existsas a resultof priorsuburbanization erty gentrifiers The potential value of thispropdencentralization. ofpotential Supply thanitscurrent value.But,as we have is greater erty exists gentrifiers ofa rent does notnecessarily seen,theexistence gap No inner citydemand No gentrificationNo gentrification ofa pool Without theexistence lead to gentrification. Inner citypreference Gentrification Gentrification? and available mortgage of potential gentrifiers by a sectionof the will not occurhowevergreat finance, gentrification 'new class' therentgap and howevergreatthedesireof developers to make it happen. And where appropriate a classification ofcircumstances. innercityhousingstockdoes not existin sufficient Butthisis merely as for example in cities such as Dallas, of quantity, It does not,of itself, providea basis of a theory and westernUS And,as we have seen,thekeyquestion Pheonix and othernew southern gentrification. however is itsstarting forsucha theory may be verylimited, point.It is inadequate cities,gentrification of a combi- large the new serviceclass. In older north-eastern is the result to argue thatgentrification and citiessuch as Baltimore, to assign American ofcircumstances without nation Philadelphia attempting I WashingtonD.C., on the otherhand, thereis an to those circumstances. some theoretical priority rowhousing, has argued,that abundant as Beauregard have no doubt that, century supplyofnineteenth and home to 'the explanationforgentrification begins with the much of it devalued and run-down In suchcities classandminority is working and that 'gentrification populations. presence of gentrifiers' has of the defined (Beauregard, gentrification proceededapace. by presence gentrifiers' demand therehas to be some effective and conSecondly, 1986). But thisdoes not mean thatculture frompotentialgentrifiers. of for innercity property first areassigned placeintheexplanation sumption As Ley, Mullins and others have This may resultfromfinancial a inability to afford gentrification. is with the the more as is home suburban or, out, to start commonly argued, it place appropriate pointed and thesocial may stemfrom ofproduction a preference city to live in theinner changesin thestructure

Theblind men and the elephant

187

close to central and culture' side of thedebate facili- 'choice,consumption jobs and socialand cultural city in on both the had one foot of ties. This, in turn, has, fact, always very firmly growth planted depends base of serviceclass job opportunities downtown,and on in the realitiesof changes in the material and itscultural manifestations. and lifestyle changeswhichhave seen production demographic In some ways,theconflict of womenenterthelabourforceand has been betweentwo largenumbers of and dual of The one looking at numbers both households single growing interpretations production. career childless witha high changesinthesocialandspatial division oflabourand couples.Forthesegroups, inner locations ofgentrifiers, and theother at income, offer city looking disposable proximity theproduction and to restaurants, arts and other the production of the builtenvironment. But,until to employment a significant Not surprisingly, of recently,Smith has consistently facilities. the proportion interpreted in former them in terms ofindividual cityresidence appearto have optedforinner approach consumption, socialandcultural facili- culture and choice, and has generally thosecities wherecitycentre whatit rejected And this,as we have seen, has been ties exist.Withoutthis effective demand,based in had to offer. on a positive central and considerable. orientation towards Smithhas recently largepart acceptedthatit is innercity living,gentrification to occur important to integrate and consumption, is unlikely production but been howeverlargethe armyof potential and this has still in terms ofa framegentrifiers integration howeverlargetherent workwhicheither ascribesprimacy to questionsof gap. setsofconditions production or re-interprets in a collecWe are therefore facedby three consumption all of whichare necessary, and none of whichare tive non-problematic way. Smith'sconceptionof Butitis clearthattheexistence sufficient. ofa poten- individual actionis a limited and circumscribed one. is logicallyand theoretically He accepts that collectivesocial actors can make tial pool of gentrifiers and lifestyles of a gentrification, but not a multiplicity of individual priorto the housingpreferences of the service class. while the existIf the actors. criticism of has And, Ley'sposition beenmore sub-group ence of a supplyof appropriate houses is limited, it is partly becausehe has said less and been inner-city forgentrification to occur, theexistence of farless assertive in hisclaims fortheoretical necessary primacy. a rent It It is also clearthathis initial of the key gap willnot,ofitself, producegentrification. recognition is thusdifficult to acceptSmith's view thatthe rent roleofa new groupofpotential withtheir gentrifiers to any theoryof specificculturaland locational requirements was gap is 'the necessarycenterpiece correct. His sinshavebeenofomission rather Necessaryit may be, but if gentrifi- broadly gentrification'. cationtheoryhas a centrepiece it mustreston the thancommission. The supplyof dwellingsand the fortheproduction conditions ofpotential in the process have gentrifiers. role of developer/speculators by Ley. They are seen as gone largelyunexamined derived from thedemands thenew from beinglargely CONCLUSIONS class. I have attempted to show thatthe debate over the Smith'sclaim,that gentrification is a structural ofgentrification hasbeenbroadly alone,can explanation shaped productof the land and housingmarkets betweenthosewho have arguedthat now be seen to have been misplaced as Smithnow by theconflict the keyto the problem lies in global changesin the partially accepts.This is not to say thattherentgap of production structure and the social and spatial thesis was wrong. The pointis rather that therent gap division oflabour, andin theconcentration inspecific explains, at best,halftheproblem, and probably less. citiesofa section ofthe'newmiddle class'or 'service' The existence ofrelatively cheapand devaluedhousclasswitha particular and ingis a necessary, butfar from sufficient element ofan demographic composition, cultural and consumption orientation. On the other explanation. of the production Equally,explanation handSmith hasconsistently thekeyroleof of potentialgentrifiers, theirculture, arguedfor consumption investment and disinvestment in the builtenviron- andreproduction isnecessary butinsufficient. A commentand foran approachbased on the primacy of prehensive and integrated explanationof gentrifiThis conflict has manifested itself in a cationmustnecessarily involve the explanation of profitability. between so-called wheregentrifiers come from and whytheygentrify, varietyof ways. In a conflict choice and cul- how the areas and properties to be gentrified are 'supply'and 'demand'explanations, ture versus and so on.Yet,I havearguedmany producedand how the two are linked. And thereis capital of these dualismsand polaritieshave been more a strong case that, notwithstanding the role of thanreal and what Smithwould label the institutional and collectivesocial actorssuch as real apparent

188

CHRIS HAMNETT

estateagents, the School of Social Sciences,The Australian lenders, National developersand mortgage Canberra.Versions were given at the key actorsin the gentrification process have been University, individual themselves. It is necessaryto Institute of British Geographers Conference, gentrifiers in theex- University of Glasgow, January 1990 and at the acceptthatindividual agencyis important and to seek to integrate workshopon EuropeanGentrification, planationof gentrification Department and consumption not in terms of struc- ofGeography, ofUtrecht, 1990. I production University January tural causesorindividual butinterms ofstruc- am grateful forcomments on the draft effects, paper from tures and individual Blair Badcock, University of Adelaide, Steve agency. Because Smith he has Borassa, Urban ResearchUnit, ANU, Tim Butler, developedrentgap theory, been vigorousin itsdefence, tactical retreats Polytechnic of East London, David Ley and Neil making and concessions where necessary,but essentially Smith. The usualdisclaimers apply. in the seeking to ensure its continuing centrality But while Smithhas explanationof gentrification. that inthesocialandspatial division accepted changes REFERENCES of labourand the concentration of professional and inthedowntown areofconmanagerial employment viewoftherent gap siderable and has attempted to integrate BADCOCK,B. (1989)'AnAustralian importance, Ann.Ass.Am. Geogr. 79: 125-45 hypothesis', theconsumption of into his patterns gentrifiers theory, BEAUREGARD,R. A. (1984) 'Structure, and urban agency, he has done thisin such a way thatit becomes a in SMITH, M. P. (ed.) Citiesin transredevelopment', functional oflatecapitalism, rather than a requirement vol.26,Urban Affairs Annual Reviews formation, (Sage, of the role of individual and recognition preference London)pp. 51-72 ButSmith's interventions inthegentrificationBEAUREGARD,R.A. (1986) 'The chaosand complexity of agency. in SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds) debatehavenotbeencounterproductive. On thecongentrification', Thegentrification the so-calledchoice and of thecity(Allen and Unwin,London) trary, only by challenging pp. 35-55 theories and his a of advocacy preference logical, coherentalternative, has the debate over explan- BERRY,B. J.L. (1985) 'Islandsof renewalin seas of decay', in Pederson, P. (ed.) Thenewurban (The Brookings reality ationsadvancedas far as ithas.Precisely becauseLey Institute, D.C.) Washington, and Smith different theories and radically pioneered of mortgagefinance: BODDY, M. (1976) 'The structure of gentrification, it has been possible interpretations societies and theBritish socialformation', Trans. building to advanceourunderstanding of theprocessby seeInst.Br.Geogr. N.S. 1: 58-71 fit If CLARK,E. (1988) 'The rentgap and transformation of the ing how the two partial explanations together. their work hasbeenshowntobe limited incertain builtenvironment: case studiesin Malmo 1860-1985', key Annaler 70B: 241-54 Geografiska respectsand theyhave had to amendtheir explanations,thisis thepricepaid by theoretical pioneers. CYBRIWSKY, R. A., LEY, D. and WESTERN, J. (1986) 'The politics and social construction of revitalized Neithermay have recognizedthe elephantof genSociety Hill, Philadelphiaand False neighbourhoods: trification at first, but theyeach identified a keypart Creek,Vancouver',in SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS, P. of its anatomy, and otherresearchers have subse(eds) Gentrification oftheCity(Allen& Unwin,London) beenableto piecetogether a moreintegrated quently pp. 92-120 As Clark(1988) concluded: explanation. DINGEMANS, D. J. (1978) 'Redliningand
in 69: Ca.', Ana. Ass. Am. Geogr. We should theone-dimensional stopasking question: lending Sacramento, 'Which of gentrification is true, the rent-gap 225-39 theory marxism and thepost-industrial the DUNCAN, J.and LEY, D. (1982) Structural restructuration theory, theory, humangeography: a critical assessment. Ann.Ass. Am. consumer demand foramenities or theinstitheory, 72: 30-59 Geogr. tutionalist andstart 'If itisso that there is theory?', asking R. (1979) Understanding GOETZE, neighbourhood change for allthese canwe arrive at theories, empirical support Mass.) (Ballinger, Coalbridge, an understanding ina ofthewaysinwhich stand they geograrelation ofcomplementarity?' in GREGORY, D. (1981) 'Humanagencyand human logical (p.247 emphasis Inst. Br.Geogr. N.S. 6: 1-18 phy'.Trans. original). mortgage

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

and residential HAMNETT, C. (1984) 'Gentrification locationtheory: a reviewand assessment', in HERBERT, D. T. andJOHNSTON, R.J. andthe urban (eds) Geography environment. Thispaperwas written whiletheauthor was a visiting Progress in research and applications, vol. 6 (John research fellow at theUrbanResearch Research Unit, Wiley,London)pp. 283-319

Theblind men andthe elephant

189

on employment dis- ROSE, D. (1989) 'A feminist HAMNETT, C. and RANDOLPH W. (1986) 'Landlord perspective and gentrification: and housingmarket in thecase ofMontreal', investment transformation: the flat restructuring WOLCH, J.and DEAR, M. (eds) Thepower ofgeography: break-upmarketin London', in WILLIAMS, P. and how territory SMITH, N. (eds) Gentrification ofthecity shapessocial life(Unwin Hyman,London) (George Allen and Unwin,London)pp. 121-52 pp. 118-38 of HAMNETT, C. and RANDOLPH, W. (1987) Cities, housing SCHAFFER,R. and SMITH, N. (1986) 'The gentrification andprofits Ann.Ass.Am. Geogr. 76: 347-65 Harlem?', (Hutchinson, London) re- SMITH, A. (1989) 'Gentrification and the spatial conHARTMAN, C. (1979) 'Commenton neighbourhood and displacement: a reviewof theevidence', of the State: the restructuring of London's vitalization stitution Am. Plan. Ass. 45: 488-94 21: 232-60 Docklands', Antipode ]. a finance HARVEY, D. (1974) Class monopolyrent, capital SMITH, N. (1979) 'Toward a theoryof gentrification: backto thecitymovement and theurbanrevolution. Am. notpeople',J. by capital, Reg.Stud.8: 239-55 Plan.Ass. 45: 538-48 HARVEY, D. (1978) 'The urbanprocessundercapitalism: and uneven developa framework foranalysis', Int. J.Urb.Reg.Res.2: 101-31 SMITH, N. (1982) 'Gentrification Econ.Geogr. 58: 139-55 101-31 ment', and thereand growth thefrontier, HOYT, H. (1939) The structure of residential SMITH, N. (1986) 'Gentrification, ofurban in Americancities (Federal Housing structuring neighbourhoods space,inSMITH, N. andWILLIAMS, P. (eds) Gentrification Administration, D.C.) of the city (Allen and Unwin, Washington London)pp. 15-34 KING, R. J. (1989c) 'Capital switchingand the role of andhousing: between circuits, groundrent:3. Switching, switching SMITH, N. (1987a) 'Of yuppies gentrification, social restructuring and the urban dream',Society and and socialchange, Plann. A Environ. betweensubmarkets, 21: 853-80 Space5: 151-72 and therentgap', Ann. LEGATES,R. T. and HARTMAN, C. (1986) 'The anatomy SMITH, N. (1987b) 'Gentrification Ass.Am. Geogr. 77: 462-78 in theUnitedStates',in SMITH, N. and of displacement turn', WILLIAMS,P. (eds) The (Allenand SMITH, N. (1987c) 'Dangersoftheempirical gentrification ofthe city Antipode 19: 59-68 Unwin,London),pp. 178-203 units LEY,D. (1978) 'Inner societalcontext', SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds) (1986) Gentrification of city resurgence thecity (Allenand Unwin,London) mimeo, to theAAG AnnualConference, paperpresented New Orleans STERNLIEB,G. and HUGHES, J.W. (1983) 'The uncertain futureof the centralcity', Urban Affairs LEY, D. (1980) 'Liberalideology and post-industrial Quart. 18: city', 455-72 Ann.Ass.Am. Geogr. 70: 238-58 in Canada: a revitalization and disSUMKA, H. (1979) 'Neighbourhood LEY, D. (1981) 'Inner city revitalization a reviewoftheevidence', Am. Plan. Vancouvercase study', CanadianGeogr. 25: 124-48 Ass.45: placement: ]. 480-7 LEY, D. (1986) Alternative explanationsfor innercity A Canadian assessment. Ann. Ass. Am. WALKER,R. and GREENBERG,D. (1982) 'Post-industrialgentrification: ism and political in the city:a critique', reform 76: 521-35 Geogr. Antipode 14: 17-32 Ann.Ass.Am. LEY, D. (1987) Reply:therentgap revisited. 77: 465-68 societies andtheinner WILLIAMS,P. (1978) 'Building Geogr. city', Trans. Inst.Br.Geogr. 3: 23-34 and MARCUSE, P. (1986) 'Abandonment, gentrification inNew YorkCity',inSMITH, WILLIAMS, P. (1984) 'Economic processes and urban thelinkages displacement: N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds) Thegentrification ofcontemporary ofresidenofthecity change:an analysis patterns Austr. Stud.22: 39-5 7 tialrestructuring', (Allenand Unwin,London)pp. 153-177 Geogr. and the residential WOLFE, J.,DROVER, G. and SKELTON, I. (1980) 'Inner MOORE, P. W. (1982) 'Gentrification in Montreal: institutional characcityrealestateactivity geography of the New Class, mimeo,Scarborough of decline', CanadianGeogr. 24: 348-67 teristics College,Univ.ofToronto and theinner culture MULLINS, P. (1982) 'The 'middle-class' and capitalin urban city', ZUKIN, S. (1982) Loftliving: Polit. Econ.11, 44-58 J.Australian (Johns Press, change, Baltimore) HopkinsUniversity and capitalin the andgen- ZUKIN, S. (1987) 'Gentrification: MUNT, I. (1987) 'Economic culture culture restructuring, urbancore',Am. Rev.Sociology a case studyof Battersea, 13: 129-47 trification: London, Environ. A 19: 1175-97 Plann. ROSE, D. (1984) 'Rethinking beyond the gentrification: uneven developmentof marxist urbantheory', Society and Space2: 47-74