Gentrification—the creation of affluent space—has evolved from a sporadic and spontaneous process focusing on individual households into a municipal goal in and of itself, either in existing neighbourhoods, or in new-build developments. This is increasingly being done through flagship new-build gentrification projects. This paper examines why and how this strategy has been implemented in Rotterdam and Glasgow through a study of two projects: the Kop van Zuid and Glasgow Harbour. By using a comparative approach, it sheds further light on reasons for pursuing this municipal goal, and examines how large new-build flagship gentrification is used to help realise these aims. It reveals a discourse in which the rationale of this policy is linked to the attraction and retention of affluent households, a lack of which, it is believed by policy makers, hurts urban competitiveness. It shows that this discourse is present and influences these two projects despite the different compositions of actors involved (the municipally led Kop van Zuid and the developer-led Glasgow Harbour). However, the ways in which this goal is implemented vary according to the local contexts and the different roles ascribed to the various stakeholders.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BadcockB, 2001, “Thirty years on: gentrification and class changeover in Adelaide's inner suburbs, 1966–1996”Urban Studies381559–1572
2.
BianchiniFDawsonJEvansR, 1992, “Flagship projects in urban regeneration”, in Rebuilding the City: Property-led Urban Regeneration Eds HealeyPDavoudiSO'TooleMUsherDTavsanogluS (E & FN Spon, London) pp 245–255
3.
BloklandT V, 2001, “Bricks, mortar, memories: neighbourhood and networks in collective acts of remembering”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research25268–283
4.
BoddyM, 2007, “Designer neighbourhoods: new-build residential development in nonmetropolitan UK cities—the case of Bristol”Environment and Planning A3986–105
5.
BridgeG, 2003, “Time–space trajectories in provincial gentrification.”Urban Studies402545–2556
ButlerT, 1997, Gentrification and the Middle Classes (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants)
8.
BuzarSHallROgdenP, 2007, “Beyond gentrification: the demographic reurbanisation of Bologna”Environment and Planning A3964–85
9.
DavidsonM, 2007, “Gentrification as a global habitat: a process of class formation or corporate creation?”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series32490–506
10.
DavidsonM, 2008, “Spoiled mixture: where does state-led ‘positive’ gentrification end?”Urban Studies452385–2405
11.
DavidsonMLeesL, 2005, “New-build ‘gentrification’ and London's riverside renaissance”Environment and Planning A371165–1190
12.
DETR, 2000, Our Towns and Cities—The Future: Delivering an Urban Renaissance Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (The Stationery Office, London)
13.
Diaz OruetaFFainsteinF, 2008, “The new mega-projects: genesis and impacts”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32759–767
14.
DoucetB, 2009, “A tale of two waterfronts: goals, roles and visions in Rotterdam's Kop van Zuid and Glasgow Harbour”, paper presented at the RSA Old Industrial Regions Conference, The Regeneration of Image in Old Industrial Regions, Mönchengladbach, Regional Studies Association; copy available from the author
15.
DuttonP, 2003, “Leeds calling: the influence of London on the gentrification of regional cities”Urban Studies402557–2572
16.
EisingerP, 2000, “The politics of bread and circuses: building the city for the visitor class”Urban Affairs Review35316–333
17.
FainsteinS, 2008, “Mega-projects in New York, London and Amsterdam”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32768–785
18.
FloridaR, 2002The Rise of the Creative Class … and How it's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life (Basic Books, New York)
19.
GemeenteRotterdam, 2007Stadsvisie Rotterdam (Rotterdam Urban Vision), dienst Stedenbouw en Volkshuisvesting, Ontwikkelingsbedrijf Rotterdam (Housing and Urban Development, Rotterdam Development Corporation)
20.
Glasgow City Council, 2005Clyde Waterfront Regeneration Annual ReportGlasgow City Council
21.
Glasgow City Council, 2008Glasgow City Council Plan 2008–2011Glasgow City Council
22.
GlassR, 1964, “Introduction. Aspects of change”, in London: Aspects of Change (MacGibbon and Kee, London) pp xiii–xlii
23.
GlynnS, 2008, “Soft-selling gentrification?”Urban Research and Practice1164–180
24.
Gutzon LarsenHLund HansenA, 2008, “Gentrification gentle or traumatic? Urban renewal policies and socioeconomic transformations in Copenhagen”Urban Studies452429–2448
25.
HackworthJSmithN, 2001, “The changing state of gentrification”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie92464–477
26.
HarrisA, 2008, “From London to Mumbai and back again: gentrification and public policy in comparative perspective”Urban Studies452407–2428
27.
HarveyD, 1989, “From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation of urban governance in late capitalism”Geografiska Annaler713–17
28.
JagerM, 1986, “Class definition and aesthetics of gentrification: Victoriana in Melbourne”, in Gentrification and the City Eds SmithNWilliamsP (Allen Unwin, Boston, MA) pp 78–91
29.
KeatingM, 1988The City that Refused to Die, Glasgow: The Politics of Urban Regeneration (Aberdeen University Press, Aberdeen)
30.
Kop vanZuid, 1995Kop van Zuid (010 Rotterdam)
31.
Kop vanZuid, 1999Kop van Zuid 2 (010 Rotterdam)
32.
LambertCBoddyM, 2002, “Transforming the city: post-recession gentrification and re-urbanisation”, paper presented at the Conference on Upward Neighbourhood Trajectories: Gentrification in the New Century, 26–27 September, University of Glasgow; CNR paper 6, ESRC Centre for Neighbourhood Research, University of Bristol
33.
LeesL, 2000, “A reappraisal of gentrification: towards a ‘geography of gentrification’”Progress in Human Geography24389–408
34.
LeesL, 2003, “Policy (re)turns: gentrification research and urban policy—urban policy and gentrification research”Environment and Planning A35571–574
35.
LeesL, 2008, “Gentrification and social mixing: towards an inclusive urban renaissance?”Urban Studies452449–2470
36.
LeesLLeyD, 2008, “Introduction to special issue on gentrification and public policy”Urban Studies452379–2384
37.
LeesLSlaterTWylyE, 2008Gentrification (Routledge, New York)
38.
LehrerULaidleyL, 2008, “Old mega-projects newly packaged? Waterfront redevelopment in Toronto”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32786–803
39.
LoopmansM, 2008, “Relevance, gentrification and the development of a new hegemony on urban policies in Antwerp, Belgium”Urban Studies422499–2519
40.
McIntyreZ, 2008Rebuilding Glasgow: Regeneration and Gentrification in a Post-industrial Context PhD dissertation, Department of Urban Studies, Glasgow University
41.
MacLeodG, 2002, “From urban entrepreneurialism to a ‘revanchist city’? On the social injustices of Glasgow's renaissance”Antipode34602–624
42.
MarcuseP, 1986, “Abandonment, gentrification and displacement: the linkages in New York City”, in Gentrification and the City Eds SmithNWilliamsP (Unwin Hyman, London) pp 153–177
43.
MillsC, 1988, “‘Life on the upslope’: the postmodern landscape of gentrification”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space6169–189
44.
MoulaertFRodriguezASwyngedouwE (Eds), 2003The Globalized City: Economic Restructuring and Social Polarization in European Cities (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
45.
MurphyL, 2008, “Third-wave gentrification in New Zealand: the case of Auckland”Urban Studies452521–2540
46.
SlaterT, 2004, “Municipally managed gentrification in south Parkdale, Toronto”The Canadian Geographer48303–325
47.
SlaterT, 2006, “The eviction of critical perspectives from gentrification research”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research30737–757
48.
SmithD, 2008, “The politics of studentification and ‘(un)balanced’ urban populations: lessons for gentrification and sustainable communities?”Urban Studies452541–2564
49.
SmithDHoltL, 2007, “Studentification and ‘apprentice’ gentrifiers within Britain's provincial towns and cities: extending the meaning of gentrification”Environment and Planning A39142–161
50.
SmithN, 1979, “Towards a theory of gentrification: a back to the city movement of capital, not people”Journal of the American Planning Association45538–548
51.
SmithN, 1996The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City (Routledge, New York)
52.
SmithN, 2002, “New globalism, new urbanism: gentrification as a global urban strategy”Antipode34427–450
53.
SpainD, 1993, “Been-heres versus come-heres”Journal of the American Planning Association59156–172
54.
SwyngedouwEMoulaertFRodriguezA, 2002, “Neoliberal urbanization in Europe: large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy”Antipode34432–577
55.
Tasan-KokT, 2010, “Entrepreneurial governance: challenges of large-scale property-led urban regeneration projects”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie101126–149
56.
TiesdellS, 2009, “Glasgow: renaissance on the Clyde?”, in Urban Design and the British Urban Renaissance Ed. PunterJ (Routledge, London) pp 262–279
57.
UitermarkJ, 2003, “‘Social mixing’ and the management of disadvantaged neighbourhoods: the Dutch policy of urban restructuring revisited”Urban Studies40531–549
58.
UitermarkJDuyvendakJ, 2008, “Civilising the city: populism and revanchist urbanism in Rotterdam”Urban Studies451485–1503
59.
UitermarkJDuyvendakJKleinhansR, 2007, “Gentrification as a governmental strategy: social control and social cohesion in Hoogvliet, Rotterdam”Environment and Planning A39125–141
60.
van CriekingenMDecrolyJ, 2003, “Revisiting the diversity of gentrification: neighbourhood renewal processes in Brussels and Montreal”Urban Studies402451–2468
61.
van WeesepJ, 1994, “Gentrification as a research frontier”Progress in Human Geography1874–83
62.
VicarioLMartínez-MonjeP M, 2003, “Another ‘Guggenheim effect’ ? The generation of a potentially gentrifiable neighbourhood in Bilbao”Urban Studies402380–2400
63.
VisserGKotzeN, 2008, “The state and new-build gentrification in central Cape Town, South Africa”Urban Studies452565–2593
64.
WalksAAugustM, 2008, “The factors inhibiting gentrification in areas with little non-market housing: policy lessons from the Toronto experience”Urban Studies452594–2625
65.
WardeA, 1991, “Gentrification as consumption: issues of class and gender”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space9223–232
