Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Is gentrification good for vancouver's downtown eastside dbq essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Theoretical Lenses I. Urban Elite Theory Urban elite theory will provide students with a theoretical lens by which to understand the redevelopment projects initiated in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver during the lead-up to the 2010 Olympic Games. Urban elite theory extends the scope of classical elite theory by adding that a metropolis is divided by its physical districts based on class distinctions (Darity et. al., 2008). The presence and power of elites, however, is not seen as entirely negative according to this theoretical perspective. Instead, the collusion of elites is necessary for stability and efficiency within a political system. If urban elite theory were to be applied to the Vancouver case, one hypothesis would be that urban elites participate in development projects in order to maximize their political power and consolidate their involvement within certain communities. A successful gentrification project redevelops an area through the collaboration of political and business elites. Such a project would provide housing that caters to young professionals who will so...
Class, and the Cultural Politics of Neoliberal Urban Restructuring . The Great Cities Institute, GCP-09-02, 3. Retrieved April 5, 2014.
Another noteworthy urban sociologist that’s invested significant research and time into gentrification is Saskia Sassen, among other topical analysis including globalization. “Gentrification was initially understood as the rehabilitation of decaying and low-income housing by middle-class outsiders in central cities. In the late 1970s a broader conceptualization of the process began to emerge, and by the early 1980s new scholarship had developed a far broader meaning of gentrification, linking it with processes of spatial, economic and social restructuring.” (Sassen 1991: 255). This account is an extract from an influential book that extended beyond the field of gentrification and summarizes its basis proficiently. In more recent and localized media, the release the documentary-film ‘In Jackson Heights’ portrayed the devastation that gentrification is causing as it plagues through Jackson Heights, Queens. One of the local businessmen interviewed is shop owner Don Tobon, stating "We live in a
There are many examples of cities reforming itself over time, one significant example is Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. More than a hundred years after the discovery of gold that drew thousands of migrants to Vancouver, the city has changed a lot, and so does one of its oldest community: Downtown Eastside. Began as a small town for workers that migrants frequently, after these workers moved away with all the money they have made, Downtown Eastside faced many hardships and changes. As a city, Vancouver gave much support to improve the area’s living quality and economics, known as a process called gentrification. But is this process really benefiting everyone living in Downtown Eastside? The answer is no. Gentrification towards DTES(Downtown Eastside) did not benefit the all the inhabitants of the area. Reasons are the new rent price of the area is much higher than before the gentrification, new businesses are not community-minded, and the old culture and lifestyle of the DTES is getting erased by the new residents.
“gentrification as an ugly product of greed. Yet these perspectives miss the point. Gentrification is a byproduct of mankind 's continuing interest in advancing the notion that one group is more superior to another and worthy of capitalistic consumption with little regard to social consciousness. It is elitism of the utmost and exclusionary politics to the core. This has been a constant theme of mankind to take or deplete a space for personal gain. In other words, it 's very similar to the "great advantage" of European powers over Native Americans and westward expansion”(Wharton).
Sociology is the study of society and the interactions that occur within society itself. There are numerous methods of analyzing societies and the way the function, nonetheless, most methods fall in micro and macro level theories. Micro level theories allow sociologist to study smaller relationships such as individual or compact groups of people. On the other hand, macro level studies permit for larger scale investigations to take place. With both of these theories there are three theoretical perspectives used in sociology. Micro level theories include symbolic interactionism which focuses in interactions done with language and gestures and the means which allow such interactions to take place. Macro level theories include structural functionalism
Similar to a well oiled machine, a political system is concerned with processing the demands of a society to then provide the goods and services demanded while ensuring its own establishment (Berg 1). However, considering that the idea of a political system is a social construct, its form is subject to a myriad of complex and conflicting forces. The most palpable force is that of a city’s financial needs. Any locale has the burden of satisfying the demands of its constituents with limited resources. In addition to having limited resources, urban cities are also usually comprised of many diverse ethnic backgrounds with different demands and needs. Equitable distribution of limited resources to different ethnic and social backgrounds could have
In this article, the author writes about the Urban Renewal Plan and what it did to a community in Oakland, California. The West Oakland community was found in 1852 and had a diverse population living there. That article says that upper-class people would be living next door to working class people. After the World Wars that changed because lower income families started moving to the area looking for jobs. The jobs they had were created because of the war. When the war ended these people lost their jobs. At the same time, the Urban Renewal Plan was put into place. This plan set out to remove slums in urban places. This plan would relocated families, demolish houses and create low-income housing. When a family was relocated they received little
Gentrification is described as the renovation of certain neighborhoods in order to accommodate to young workers and the middle-class. For an area to be considered gentrified, a neighborhood must meet a certain median home value and hold a percentage of adults earning Bachelor’s degree. Philadelphia’s gentrification rate is among the top in the nation; different neighborhoods have pushed for gentrification and have seen immense changes as a result. However, deciding on whether or not gentrification is a beneficial process can become complicated. Various groups of people believe that cities should implementing policy on advancing gentrification, and others believe that this process shouldn’t executed. Both sides are impacted by the decision to progress gentrification; it is unclear of the true implications of completely renovating impoverished urban areas; gentrification surely doesn’t solve all of a community’s issues. I personally believe that gentrification is not necessarily a good or bad process; gentrification should occur as a natural progression of innovative economies and novel lifestyles collide within certain areas. Policy involving gentrification should not support the removal of people out of their neighborhood for the sake of advancement.
Historically, the city was an all-encompassing entity. At the dawn of industrialization, large masses of people flocked to the city in hopes of a better economic life for themselves and their families. It was within the city limits, particularly closest to the areas of commerce and exchange that people took up residence, worked, and pursued various social activities. The city served the needs of all its citizens. However, as industrialization moved further along, there was a major shift in urban economics. While many businesses flourished, so did wealth and as this increased, society faced an evolving class system. Three notable classes emerged: the lower/working class, the middle class, and the upper/elite class. While these class divisions grew, a large amount of money was being invested in the creation of public venues. Public institutions were designed to bring education, culture, and in many ways, a sense of community to modern city life. A public park or library was a place that people of various classes could come together and share space. However, by the end of the Twentieth century and into the Twenty-First, true public space is becoming almost extinct, as is the middle class. Privatized public space has become the new trend across many American cities.
...r of inequality in America, with so much poverty located within such a close proximity to the White House. That being said, gentrification efforts in DC appear to be focused on removing poor people, or at the very least, the visual image of crime, poverty, and corruption as it relates to the most powerful city in the country. Community activist groups have tried time and time again to stop gentrification from affecting their community, but often times, to no avail. What is truly sad is that while this cycle is continually perpetuated as a matter of “haves versus have nots” the way in which this system seems to always disproportionately marginalize one race of people in favor of another, does raise the question as to whether or not gentrification was orchestrated to operate in such a manner; and if so, what are the affected groups going to do about it.
The structure of power in society is a vital part of understanding sociology. The two main theories that differentiate this structure are Mills’ theory of a power elite and Riesman’s contrasting theory of veto groups, or pluralism. Both theories are often found in varying degrees when considering important public decisions, such as the Hoover Redevelopment Plan or the University Village Plan. Generally, one of these theories is more applicable and relevant to certain public decisions and developments depending on the issue. While both of these theories played a part in the Hoover Redevelopment Plan and the University Village Plan, the power elite theory is ultimately more responsible for the institution of these developments.
Prior to this, I had never heard of any benefit of gentrification; rather, I had the typical preconceived notion that Freeman discusses: gentrification is a demonic force that inflicts suffering in all poor people in a gentrified neighborhood. However, reading excerpts from “There Goes the ‘Hood” encourages me to rethink my position. One of my questions from the reading pertains to the “race” part of the author’s argument. Although Clinton Hill and Harlem are both predominantly comprised of African Americans, I wonder how low-income white residents feel about gentrification. I am curious about this because a friend of mine, a white Irish, was displaced from her home in Sunnyside, Queens last summer because of increasing rent. From this experience, I think that seeing low-income whites’ outlooks on white gentry would be interesting. Furthermore, I question the validity of the author’s selection on some of the participants for his interview, particularly those whom he recruited in a conference on gentrification (page 12). One could imagine that community members who attend such a conference would hold strong opinions about gentrification. However, would not this contradict his earlier point that “the most active and vocal residents are not necessarily representative of the entire neighborhood and are likely different” (page 7) and thus undermining the integrity of some of his
Gentrification does not follow traditional urban growth theory, which predicts ?the decline of inner city areas as monied classes move to the metropolitan fringe.? The traditional economic model of real estate says that wealthy people can choose their housing from the total city market (Schwirian 96). Once these people decide to live in the suburbs, the lower social classes move into the old homes of the upper class, essentially handing housing down the socioeconomic ladder. Gentrification is actually a reversal of this process. For a variety of reasons, many inner city areas are becoming more attractive to the wealthy, and they are selecting their housing in those areas (Schwirian 96). The problem is that now when the wealthy take over poor homes and renovate them, the poor cannot afford the housing that the wealthy have abandoned. Many researchers have argued whether gentrification has truly created problems in cities. I will analyze the arguments for and against gentrification by exploring the subject from both sides.
Gentrification is the keystone for the progression of the basic standards of living in urban environments. A prerequisite for the advancement of urban areas is an improvement of housing, dining, and general social services. One of the most revered and illustrious examples of gentrification in an urban setting is New York City. New York City’s gentrification projects are seen as a model for gentrification for not only America, but also the rest of the world. Gentrification in an urban setting is much more complex and has deeper ramifications than seen at face value. With changes in housing, modifications to the quality of life in the surrounding area must be considered as well. Constant lifestyle changes in a community can push out life-time
Purtill, Maureen. 2009. A Call for Critical Race Studies in Urban Planning. Critical Planning. 16: 218-222