45(12) 2499–2519, November 2008

Relevance, Gentrification and the Development of a New Hegemony on Urban Policies in ,

Maarten Loopmans

[Paper first received, August 2007; in final form, July 2008]

Abstract This paper applies a state-theoretical perspective to a historical analysis of gentrifi cation and urban policies in Antwerp, Belgium. Before 1970, the city experienced a period of modernist hegemony, with urban development policies characterised by slum clearing, peripheral high-rise social housing construction and inner-city offi ce development. After moving through a period of non-hegemony with intense debate and struggle about urban development, the city now appears to be experiencing another period of hegemony in urban policy of which state support for gentrifi cation has become the centrepiece. A historical state-theoretical approach shows how this move has been the consequence of local institutionalisation and political confl icts following the collapse of modernism, and provides insight into the opportunities available for critical observers of gentrifi cation to enhance policy relevance.

Introduction: Gentrifi cation and policies in favour of gentrifi cation, the ques- the Policy Relevance Debate tion arises as to how the mass of academic literature critical of the negative social effects In recent years, a revived interest from policy- of gentrification has come to be ignored makers in the gentrifi cation of central-city (Lees, 2003). Recognising the opportunities neighbourhoods has been documented in for policy relevance attached to this growing the gentrifi cation literature (Badcock, 2001; interest in gentrification among policy- Hackworth and Smith, 2001; Smith, 2002; makers, Lees (2003) calls for an increased Wyly and Hammel, 1999, 2001; Lees, 2003; dialogue between academic researchers of Slater, 2004; Uitermark et al., 2007). As gentrifi cation and policy-makers. While other policy-makers throughout cities of the West commentators fear that just such a dialogue are now promoting gentrifi cation as the key with pro-gentrifi cation policy-makers would to urban regeneration and have developed remove critical perspectives from gentrifi cation

Maarten Loopmans is in STeR—Urban Design and Spatial Planning, University College , Nijverheidskaai 170, Brussels, B-1070, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected].

0042-0980 Print/1360-063X Online © 2008 Urban Studies Journal Limited DOI: 10.1177/0042098008097107

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22499499 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:072:21:07 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2500 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

research altogether (Slater, 2006, p. 751), Lees interstices must be sought by researchers to asks us mobilize support, establish a fi rm institutional basis and advance critical claims that may or What is the point of a substantial, critical, and may not tally with those of the authorities vigorous academic literature on gentrifi cation (Beaumont et al., 2005, p. 124). if it is not actually disseminated to those in a position to infl uence and make the policies we Repeatedly, gentrifi cation researchers have seek to inform? (Lees, 2003, p. 573). been called to arms to take policy seriously in understanding the form, scale and scope of The resurfacing debate on relevance in geo- gentrifi cation (van Weesep, 1994; Lees, 2000) graphy in general (for example, Pacione, but so far there have been only few explicit 1999; Massey, 2000, 2001, 2002; Martin, 2001, attempts in this direction (for example, Wyly 2002; Dorling and Shaw, 2002; Imrie, 2004; and Hammel, 1999, 2001; Hackworth and Beaumont et al. 2005; Ward, 2005; Pain, 2006) Smith, 2001; Slater, 2004; Uitermark et al., has equally struggled with the dilemma of 2007) and, with some notable exceptions either having to sell one’s critical soul to the (in particular Uitermark et al., 2007, who devil and get access to government and its strongly emphasise the governmental and allied institutions, or remain distant from the institutional dimension to explain state-led state but at the same time without impact. gentrifi cation), the (local) state continues to However, in recent contributions, the debate be treated as a Black box whose internal pro- has moved to a more nuanced level of reason- cesses deserve little or no investigation. ing (Blanc, 2000; Massey, 2002; Imrie, 2004; In this paper, I will take up Lees’ (2000) Beaumont et al., 2005; Ward, 2005; Pain, challenge to take a closer look at particular 2006). These latter contributors argue that urban regeneration policies and the represen- producing policy-relevant research goes well tations and discourses on gentrifi cation that beyond working with or for policy-makers. fi gure in it. I argue that, to understand the Questioning whether getting the minister’s spaces of relevance available to gentrifi cation ear is always the most effective route to affect researchers in a context of state-led gentrifi - policy-making, they set out to analyse how cation in a particular city, it is fi rst of all neces- more diverse ‘spaces of relevance’ (Beaumont sary to analyse how and why the state has et al., 2005) can be deployed. The question, come to take an interest in gentrifi cation as Imrie (2004) argues, is not so much whether public policy. or not geographers (or, in our present case, Using a neo-Gramscian state-theoretical gentrifi cation researchers) should strive for framework, I analyse how in Antwerp policy relevance, but how and by which stra- (Belgium) gentrifi cation has become a core tegies they can do so. Imrie (2004), Beaumont element for the establishment of a new et al. (2005) as well as Pain (2006) emphasise hegemony in urban policy. Seen from this the importance of an analysis of the political perspective, it is clear that gentrification and social context in which policy research policy does not appear out of the blue, on takes place, to be able to exploit fully the spaces the demand of particular actors external of relevance at hand. This presupposes an to the local state. Instead, it reveals itself as active engagement of the researcher that goes the historical and contingent outcome of far beyond the delivery of research reports a series of attempts to match the interests to authorities and writing academic journal and goals of various local actors and groups articles. To enhance relevance, Beaumont et al. and develop a common rationale for urban argue that development both inside and outside the local

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22500500 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:152:21:15 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2501

state. This process started after the crumbling whose interests are not furthered by the rul- of modernist hegemony in the 1970s, when ing constellation, lack their own coherent a counter-hegemonic discourse appeared re- framework to understand the world and their volving around the concept of liveability, to position in the world, and necessarily fall back which gentrifi cation appears as the—belated upon ideas and concepts offered to them by and probably still provisional—answer. the hegemonic social group. The paper begins with a discussion of how Secondly, Gramsci uses the concept of his- neo-Gramscian political theory might en- torical bloc to emphasise the functionality hance our understanding of the historical and of hegemony as a means of co-ordination. A geographical particularities of the interplay historical bloc refers to an alliance of different between urban policy and gentrification. forces, organisations and actors—of both The analytical framework developed is then structure and superstructure—at various applied to the case of Antwerp, Belgium. In scales (Jessop, 2005, p. 425) organised around the conclusion, I explore what this analysis a hegemonic set of ideas that give strategic teaches us in relation to the possible strategies direction and coherence to their collaborative and tactics for enhancing policy relevance in efforts. For a historical bloc to emerge, its core critical gentrifi cation research. organisation must engage in a hegemonic project, a “conscious planned struggle for Hegemony and Strategic hegemony” (Gill, 2003, p. 58; Jessop, 1997, Selectivity p. 62) which involves both the active search for compromises, shared interests, common One of the most innovative and infl uential goals, and institutional links among the ideas in Gramsci’s political theory is his con- organisations and groups of the historical cept of hegemony. Hegemony, in Gramsci’s bloc (Gramsci, 1975/2001, pp. 1612–1613) writings, has come to mean various things, and the development of a common, congru- but for the purpose of our analysis, two di- ent discourse to win the hearts and minds of mensions of it appear crucially important. the general public. First of all, Gramsci introduced the concept However, in a diverse society with a variety of hegemony to capture the ideological pre- of different and opposing interests, a historical dominance of bourgeois values and norms bloc cannot achieve full closure and hegem- over the subordinate classes (Carnoy, 1984). ony is always potentially unstable. There is Hegemony allows dominant social groups always the risk that counter-hegemonic dis- to rule by consent rather than coercion. It is courses are produced by social groups whose the situation whereby rule in the interest of interests are not furthered by the operations of a dominant social group is seen as legitimate the members of the historical bloc, or that co- by subordinate classes or groups because ordination of the historical bloc fails as mem- this particular interest is presented (and ac- bers no longer believe its co-ordinating set of cepted) as equal to or at least supportive of ideas appropriately furthers their interests. the ‘general interest’. When the historical bloc comes under duress Ives (2004) points to the role of ideology in or when counter-hegemonic discourses gain hegemony when explaining how the concept infl uence in civil society, consent is no longer of hegemony expands the defi nition of pol- the prevailing feature of rule and a phase of itics from the direct activities of government hegemony is alternated with non-hegemony and operations of state power to questions (Cox, 1983, p. 135), as Gramsci observed in of how people come to understand the world. most European countries after the First World Hegemony exists because those social groups War (Gramsci, 1975/2001, p. 1638).

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22501501 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:162:21:16 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2502 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

Jessop (1990, 2002a) adds that the struggle steering role in the development of a hegem- over hegemony is fought on a strategically onic project. Which discourses are produced selective terrain of existing discourses, organ- and which alliances are formed are key ques- isational and structural relations resulting tions to establish a periodisation of hegem- from earlier struggles. This terrain makes onic projects (not necessarily all successful in some strategies and discourses more viable establishing hegemony) leading to the cur- than others and lends to the sequence of rent phase of gentrifi cation policies (Jessop, hegemonic and non-hegemonic phases a 2002b). path-dependent and place-specifi c character This framework of analysis is then applied (Jessop, 2002a, p. 34). A crucial factor of to the involvement of local government in selectivity, according to Gramsci, is the state Antwerp in a hegemonic project focusing of hegemony or non-hegemony: Gramsci on gentrifi cation, which can be traced back argues how countervailing forces seeking to to the contradictions of modernism which take over state power or reorient state policies surfaced in the 1960s, and is the temporary should not engage in a head-on attack against end-phase of a four-stage local search for the hegemony of a historical bloc, deploying answers to these problems (see Table 1). a military metaphor a ‘war of manoeuvre’, In a fi rst phase, we witness the collapse of but require, fi rst, a ‘war of position’ to develop modernist hegemony as it faces both legit- a coherent alternative world-view, to forge imacy and co-ordination crises, leading to a alliances and networks among different period of non-hegemony. In a fi rst phase of groups in civil society and to undermine non-hegemony, a shattered historical bloc is existing hegemony (Ives, 2004, pp. 107–109). not able to provide any answers and counter- Only if hegemony falls apart, and a period hegemonic discourses gain more promin- of non-hegemony starts, do opportunities ence; but practical experiments by various appear for alternative projects to infl uence organisations do not succeed in reconciling state policies. the problems of legitimacy and co-ordination. In the following section, I will analyse how In a second phase of non-hegemony, the local gentrifi cation became the ideological focus and regional state take a stronger lead, hav- of a local hegemonic project for urban devel- ing developed an internal consensus over the opment in Antwerp. The above theoretical direction to take, but they do not succeed in discussion provides us with a framework convincing civil society. From this follows a for this analysis. It suggests how alternating last phase of state-supported gentrifi cation periods of hegemony and non-hegemony that, I contend, is thus far the most successful can be detected, and suggests that these de- hegemonic project in that it responds to both velop in a path-dependent manner. It sug- the issues of legitimacy and co-ordination, gests that the establishment of hegemony which had troubled the modernist project. requires a project that secures both legitimacy with the wider public and co-ordination of Urban Policy Programmes and relevant actors within and without the state Hegemony in Antwerp apparatus, whereas non-hegemony can re- sult from problems of either legitimacy or The Last Convulsions of Modernism: co-ordination, or both at the same time. Cataclysmic Phase, 1971–83 Central elements to the analysis of this Antwerp, a medium-sized city with a popula- history of urban development are the dis- tion of 460 000 and home to one of Europe’s cursive and organisational actions of organ- largest ports, lies in the highly urbanised isations attempting to occupy a central and north-west European core area between

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22502502 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:162:21:16 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2503

London, Paris and the Ruhr. It has a particu- separation and the promise of light, air and larly large medieval core of about 10 square space (see the collection of papers in van km and an inner ring of densely built up, Herck and Avermaete, 2006; in particular 19th-century working-class neighbourhoods de Meulder, 2006). The old, often medieval (Figure 1). Its early 20th-century inner suburbs townhouses, were relegated—literally—to a are largely contained within the adminis- folkloric museum. Modernist renewal was trative border of the city, but the city is in a the pride of the city. In one of its promotional highly competitive position with the wealthy publications of the time, the city heralded autonomous of its post-war that suburbs, where another half a million com- muters to the city reside. Antwerp is growing in a really American As a major port city, Antwerp has long had rhythm. In its centre the old houses are being a strong working-class character and ever pulled down by hundreds, in order to make since 1933—with the exception of the war place for high fl at buildings. To the South (Kiel) and to the North (Luchtbal) there are years—Antwerp has been governed by a still vast and fallow lying areas enabling a socialist mayor. Profi ting from the fl ourish- bolder town-planning on a larger scale. More ing of its port, socialist mayors Huysmans and more new modern residential quarters (1933–39) and Craeybeckx (1946–76), under are silhouetted against the sky (Publiservice, the ideological infl uence of local modernist 1957, p. 31). architects Renaat Braem, Leon Stynen and Henry van de Velde would give Antwerp, For quite some time, modernism as an ideo- compared with other Belgian cities, an im- logy of urban development succeeded in pressive modernist make-over (Toubhans providing both a degree of co-ordination and Lombaerde, 1993). After the Second between the main actors involved and strong World War in particular, slums were cleared at legitimacy among the Antwerp citizenry. unprecedented rates. In the medieval inner However, this hegemony eroded—as in city, 3500 houses, or about 35 per cent of the many Western cities—by the end of the 1960s existing housing stock, were demolished and when previously silenced subaltern voices replaced by offices, thoroughfares, public joined in a counter-hegemonic attack. Con- spaces or social housing. At the same time, servationists bemoaned the rapid destruc- high-rise social housing was created in the tion of historical monuments; progressive periphery, between 1953 and 1973 at a rate of intellectuals and artists wanted to revamp about 1000 units per year (Ceuppens, 1981). the underground spirit of the city; feminist The modernist ideology served to co-ordinate activists reclaimed city streets and public the collaborative effort of construction fi rms, spaces, monopolized by traffi c, for their chil- landowners (in the periphery) and the local dren; and local shopkeeper organisations state—operating as a collective consumer— who annually lost clients through the under- while the national state and private service mining of the housing function in the centre companies also invested in replacing the mobilised for inner-city living. All these social dilapidated inner-city housing stock with forces heavily contested the modernist renewal offi ces for a growing service economy. processes (de Smit, 2003; Verschueren, 2003, The depressing housing situation in the p. 165; Buyck, 1988). Under the common fl ag inner city and the post-war housing short- of ‘liveability’ they reclaimed the city for age, as well as the economic optimism of the its inhabitants; they fi rmly advanced their time, also stimulated widespread popular claims for a maximisation of the city’s ‘use support for the modernist ideas of functional value’ against the exchange value realised for

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22503503 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:172:21:17 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2504 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

Figure 1. The of Antwerp

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22504504 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:172:21:17 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2505

capitalist investors. To this end these social modernism received its fi nal blow: the city groups urged for civil participation in urban was not even allowed to make any major development. investments anymore until all its debts had Their concerns were taken up fi rst by a local been discharged (expected, at best, for 2012). non-governmental planning organ ‘Schelde- The close alliance between construction com- Dijle vzw’ in a report on the inner city panies and the city that had made possible the (Schelde-Dijle vzw, 1971). When in 1971 one rapid modernisation of large parts of the city of its members (Bob Cools) was appointed was shattered. All the while, a decade of fi erce alderman for spatial planning in Antwerp popular protests against an unwilling local (the fi rst ever in Belgium), these ideas also government had ruined the relations between entered the offi cial urban planning discourse the city and its activist citizens, which, accord- (see Stad Antwerpen, 1973). However, they ing to the then mayor Cools (1994, p. 141) did not spread widely: spatial planning was resembled a regular trench war. still a marginal practice in Belgium at the time From this, it is clear how modernist (see Dutt and Costa, 1992), which had little hegemony came into trouble fi rst because infl uence on wider politics. In his memoirs, the modernist discourse stopped finding Cools (1994) describes how the department legitimacy for its practices among the wider of public works, which followed an entirely public. The main focus of critique was that different logic than the urban planners, took it failed to guarantee the liveability of the the decisions on construction permits. When city for its residents. The claims for a liveable in the 1970s real estate investors discovered inner city then also troubled co-ordination the newly emerging rental offi ce market in practices as, at the time, they ran counter to Antwerp, they had few diffi culties in obtain- the strategies of construction fi rms seeking ing new construction permits, even if monu- profi t. This placed the local state in an ever ments or residential quarters needed to be more difficult position, first expressed in razed. Under fi erce protest from the popula- an internal confl ict between a newly intro- tion, and against the ideas propagated by duced planning department stressing the the planning department, high-rise office legitimacy issue and a department of public development experienced a golden age in the works trying to maintain co-ordination. central city and further increased the growth Finally, it was also externalised to the rest of of the CBD (Sanders, 1986). the historical bloc when Antwerp lost its On the other hand, the city experienced, fi nancial autonomy and thus all its leverage particularly at the end of the 1970s, a period to reconcile the claims of the citizenry and its of fi nancial hardship due to the continuation private partners. of the economic crisis. Although the plann- ing department created several plans for the Exploring Counter-discourses: revitalisation of inner-city neighbourhoods Experimental Phase, 1983–90 (Stad Antwerpen, 1973,,1978, 1980), experi- In the same year (1983), the new ‘Flemish menting with citizen participation and new regional government’ that developed from concepts, little was realised in practice: it be- Belgian decentralisation set up an ‘urban came increasingly difficult to find public renewal’ programme under pressure from a funding for the execution of the plans. In European-wide campaign led by the then 1983, after a particularly diffi cult amalga- Dutch presidency. Money was provided mation process with surrounding municipal- from the regional level for the—mainly ities, central government imposed rigorous physical —renewal of deprived urban areas. fi nancial constraints upon the city. Antwerp Antwerp grabbed the chance for a new

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22505505 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:172:21:17 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2506 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

start (Stad Antwerpen, 1989). The Flemish the renovation of dilapidated housing. Most programme had drawn much of its inspir- of the reconstructed housing consisted of ation from the 1970s experiments of the either self-renovation by owner-occupiers or Antwerp planning department, which took turning private residual rental housing into the opportunity fi nally to realise its ideas. social rental housing. Citizen participation in The Antwerp urban planning discourse the development of plans became a central had remained marginal in the 1970s but feature of the programme. The planning now gained prominence in Antwerp urban service worked together with the local univer- development circles—not just because of sity’s sociology department to gain an over- Flemish funding, but also because former view of the city’s social and housing situation, alderman for spatial planning Bob Cools and engaged the Regional Institute for Com- was elected mayor in 1983. This new offi cial munity Development (Regionaal Instituut discourse drew from the popular critique of voor Samenlevingsopbouw, hereafter RISO) modernism, but it retained the modernists’ to organise citizen participation. main social considerations (the eradication The actual execution of the plans was car- of slum housing). Key elements of the ried out by the department for public works now-offi cial problem defi nition were: and the social housing companies, under the co-ordination of the urban planning —First of all, there was the ‘urban fl ight’ of department and the residents, who had to higher-income groups to the suburbs, which organise themselves as a ‘steering committee’. had contributed to the near bankruptcy of While internal co-ordination was enhanced, the city, but also to a growing segregation between rich and poor. there was little or no interaction with organ- isations and actors outside the formal state —Secondly, there was the dilapidated housing apparatus. The private real-estate sector was stock in which predominantly poor people intentionally excluded. ‘Liveability’ had to were still residing; about 10% of the housing be stimulated for the original residents and stock was below the standards of that time. therefore displacement was to be avoided. —On top of that came a neglect of the living Bearing in mind the major tabula rasa oper- environment in urban cities, which had been ations in earlier decades, real-estate com- under pressure of road building, industry panies were suspected of disregarding this and offi ce development. There was a lack of consideration. Not that they were that inter- public transport, public space and green areas and too much traffi c, pollution and waste in ested in participating: after demand in the the streets. offi ce sector had gone down in the early 1980s, they had just discovered the potentials of —Finally, the participation of the population upmarket housing development, notably on in the development of planning has become the Antwerp waterfront alongside the River an important consideration (Stad Antwerpen, 1985). Scheldt, with its abandoned 19th century warehouses, and in ‘Zuid’, the late 19th- The urban renewal programme, co-ordinated century bourgeois area south of the centre. by the city’s planning department, succeeded Development started slowly in Zuid after in providing ambitious redevelopment new museums and cultural infrastructure plans for 15 areas in the 19th century city. had been established there in the late 1980s It promised to increase the ‘liveability’ of and gradually expanded northwards along these areas for its residents through small the waterfront. Individual gentrification measures. It involved the renewal—and often pioneers had already settled in the area in pedestrianisation- of the public domain and previous years and profi t rates there were

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22506506 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:182:21:18 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2507

much higher than in the slum areas desig- working-class areas where needs were more nated for the renewal programme. In the pressing, making SAS a somewhat élite medieval centre, 1970s individual pioneers endeavour (Stad aan de Stroom, 1990). were increasingly replaced by a rapidly ex- Consequently, SAS quickly lost legitimacy panding tourism and leisure infrastructure, both with the wider public and with local turning the area into a theme park full of government. Internal and external frictions cafés, restaurants, fashion boutiques and over concrete projects caused the group to antique shops (Verhetsel and Ceulemans, dismantle in 1994 (de Decker, 1994b). Cap- 1994; Timmerman, 1994). ital would continue its own path of urban With the advent of a new government in regeneration in the most profi table areas, six years later, the urban renewal separate and divergent from state or bottom– programme was phased out. Considering up initiatives. the virtual absence of private investors as In this fi rst, experimental phase of non- one of the programme’s greatest fl aws, the hegemony, it is interesting how counter- Flemish government sought to promote hegemonic discourses and previously urban development through public–private marginal organisations like the planning partnerships instead (de Decker, 1994a). department gain more prominence. With the In Antwerp, this renewed focus on the co- former hegemony scattered, the local state ordination problem equally failed. Inspired starts a frenetic search for a new hegemonic by a growing activity at the Antwerp water- discourse, which opened up opportunities front, a group of urban planners, architects and for these more alternative voices. The urban private investors tried to re-establish a com- renewal programme is an attempt by the mon and unifying approach to waterfront local state to seek renewed legitimacy by in- development. In 1989, ‘Stad-aan-de-Stroom’ corporating counter-hegemonic discourses, (SAS or City at the Stream) was set up as a but it neglected the co-ordination issue and quango, supported by the municipal and the was unable to enforce a coherent, city-wide Flemish government. It drew a budget from urban development coalition. SAS, on the both public and private sources in order to other hand, did show awareness of the co- develop ‘visions’ for qualitative urban devel- ordination problem, but it did not succeed opment. SAS departed from a ‘harmonious in orienting investments in a direction which vision’ on urban development (Timmerman, might also take into account the issue of live- 1994). It believed that ‘qualitative environ- ability in deprived urban neighbourhoods. ments’ would convince both investors and Nonetheless, the failed experiences of SAS the local population. Soon SAS would ex- and urban renewal inspired the establishment perience the utopianism of this hope. Project of a more coherent and sustained hegemonic developers—at the time, mainly construction project in the next phase. companies looking for quick gains1—were unwilling to let their investment decisions A Hegemonic Project Gaining be co-ordinated by the SAS vision, choosing Ground: Social Urban Policy quick profit instead of the promised sus- Phase, 1990–2003 tainable collective benefi ts. Moreover, citizen participation was not very high on the agenda. In the year 1988, Antwerp politics experienced It was limited to a series of ‘preliminary a shock. A large part of the Antwerp populace hearings’ at the beginning of the project and turned away from the governing parties and no solutions were offered to the 19th-century voted for, among other ‘protest parties’, the

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22507507 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:182:21:18 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2508 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

extreme-right racist party Vlaams Blok. integration of deprived people—VFIK) next Analyses showed how the Vlaams Blok elec- to and apart from the urban renewal pro- torate at the time was dominated by less gramme which petered out. educated, White, poor and working-class In Antwerp, the birth of this fund has been urbanites from deprived 19th-century taken as a chance to redirect urban develop- neighbourhoods and most political analysts ment from physical to more social aspects. sustained the view that the White urban poor In 1990, a new public–private body was set had grabbed the Vlaams Blok as a lever to up (neighbourhood development company ask for attention to the problems they experi- or BOM), a collaboration among the plann- enced with the infl ux of foreign immigrants ing and social policy departments of the in their neighbourhoods and to express their city of Antwerp, the city’s Public Centre for more general political alienation. As the Social Welfare (Openbaar Centrum voor party’s electoral basis continued to grow, Maatschappelijk Welzijn, hereafter OCMW), the questions the Vlaams Blok had been the sociology department of the University putting up at that time (immigration and of Antwerp and the community develop- unsafety) became strong factors in the dis- ment NGO RISO. The BOM drew funding course on cities and prompted a new inter- from various sources (among them, the EU’s pretation of ‘liveability’ in 19th-century Third Poverty Programme and URBAN inner-city neighbourhoods (see Loopmans Pilot projects) and focused on highly visual, et al., 2003; de Decker et al., 2005). The pre- ‘strategic impulse’ projects. It included phy- dominantly ‘physical’ approach to urban sical renewal, but integrated with economic renewal in the 1980s was now deemed too development projects (attracting new fi rms restricted to establish ‘liveability’ in general. to deprived inner-city areas) and social devel- Indeed, similar signals had already been opment in one integrated area development received in the hearings during the urban project (Moulaert, 2000, pp. 97–101). renewal participation process and earlier At the federal level, a ‘safety fund’ had (Stad Antwerpen, 1978). Citizens had voiced been developed in 1992 in order to tackle their discontent over both the growing unsafety in city neighbourhoods (de Decker ethnic diversity in their neighbourhoods for et al., 2005). The safety funds considerably disrupting established patterns of social increased the means for local policing, but cohesion and over the individuality and in- would later on move more into the sphere of civility in contemporary urban life. How- urban development. However, so far, safety ever, as these were considered ‘social prob- remained beyond the limit of the BOM and lems’, they had not been ‘upgraded’ to urgent urban development initiatives in Antwerp needs within an urban planning logic (Stad and there was little co-ordination between Antwerpen, 1978, 1985). The continued neglect safety contracts and urban development. of this ‘social’ pillar of urban renewal by the The Flemish social exclusion fund VFIK planning department suggested the need for evolved, under the infl uence of the BOM ex- a new approach and necessitated another ample, into the social impulse fund (SIF) (van recentring of the institutional focus within Hove 2001; de Coninck and Vandenberghe, urban policy. 1996). The SIF wanted to broaden the exclu- In a direct response to the political situation sive focus on poverty of the previous funds in Antwerp (de Decker, 1999; Loopmans et al., and reconnect it to the physical approach 2003), the Flemish government set up a pro- of the urban renewal programme and to gramme for local actions against poverty questions of economic development in an and social exclusion (Flemish Fund for the integrated approach.

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22508508 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:182:21:18 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2509

Nonetheless, the SIF retained a strong the voice and legitimacy of ‘active’ residents social focus, through a mandatory priority in particular (Loopmans, 2006b). for the most deprived areas and a focus on The SIF approach, like the urban renewal social exclusion; in Antwerp, the economic policy before it, focused in the fi rst instance and physical development element even on the legitimacy issue. Although increasingly diminished compared with the period when recognising the need to co-ordinate public the BOM received EU funding. Since 1995, a and private investments in the urban envir- new organisation, the Urban Development onment, neither BOM nor SIF succeeded Corporation Antwerp (Stads Ontwikkelings in providing adequate leverage for luring in Maatschappij Antwerpen, hereafter SOMA) the private real-estate sector. Leading policy- has co-ordinated the means for urban devel- makers in Antwerp claimed that the priority opment derived from higher-level authorities. for social policies in the most deprived—and SOMA, another quango, is firmly under thus high (investment) risk areas—deterred control of the Alderman for Social Affairs private investment by property developers (Christiaens et al., 2007). The planning de- (Boudry et al., 1999). Instead, after a short dip partment became even more peripheral in in the early 1990s, residential gentrifi cation this phase, as was the social housing sector. boosted again in the second half of the 1990s Again, the aim was enhancing ‘liveability’, and the sector regained attention for housing but now, liveability focuses more strongly on development in the more marketable areas social aspects instead of physical. Liveability around the waterfront and the medieval core. would be pursued more through ‘teaching Instead of individual gentrifi cation pioneers people how to live together in diversity’ and and construction companies, more inte- to decrease the social exclusion of the poor. grated property developers who specialised One very successful programme within the in waterfront development were now taking sphere of ‘social liveability’ was ‘Opsinjoren’ the lead, turning derelict warehouses and (Loopmans, 2006b), which aimed at deploy- bourgeois mansions into large loft projects ing willingly active residents in the struggle which attracted mainly older, but wealthy, for ‘liveability’ in streets and neighbour- residents. In the medieval centre, commercial hoods (for instance, by planting fl owers, keep- gentrifi cation expanded further, mainly dri- ing the streets clean and organising street ven by the boom in the fashion industries; parties) in tight collaboration with the muni- various streets were turned into new shopp- cipal services. ing districts dominated by fashion stores. After the failure of the urban renewal pro- Zuid in particular experienced rapid devel- gramme, Opsinjoren and its spin-off activities opment in the 1990s, moving from a position gave a new boost to citizen participation. It in the top 10 of Antwerp neighbourhoods successfully established fi rm links between with the lowest taxable income in 1991 to local politicians, specifi c local service depart- one of the highest taxable incomes in 2001. ments (especially the sanitation department The area has become the home of many gal- and the local police) and (mostly White, leries, architectural fi rms, designer studios native Belgian, upper working or middle and advertising agencies (Hoefnagels, 2004). class) resident organisations (Loopmans, The small amount of interaction between 2007). As politicians were eager to close ‘the SIF and gentrifi cation areas consisted of dis- gap’ between citizens and politics that had placement of lower-income groups from gen- been revealed by the success of protest votes, trifying areas—enjoying private investment the development of these relations increased —to the most deprived areas—enjoying public

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22509509 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:192:21:19 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2510 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

investment via SIF (de Maesschalck and 1998). The political situation after 2000 made Loopmans, 2002; Lauwers, 2008). it hard to neglect further these claims and yet another approach to urban development Longing for the Middle Classes: had to be invented. Simultaneously, private Gentrifi cation Policy Phase, real-estate investors started to lobby for more 2003–present state support. As the redevelopment of the waterfront and the medieval core reached The present phase of urban development its conclusion, they began to explore areas discourse started after yet another, even more where profit was less guaranteed, such as overwhelming, electoral victory by the ex- Antwerp-North, the Haussmannised zone treme right. Although the public debate has along the former medieval city walls linking moved on from the original caricature of the 19th-century working-class areas in the the bitter urban poor voting for the Vlaams north-east to the city centre or the severely Blok, the Vlaams Blok electorate is still rundown red-light Schipperskwartier dominated by White less educated working- on the Scheldt river to the north of the medi- class voters. The party’s electoral rise can be eval core (Lauwers, 2008). explained primarily by geographical expan- The political sense of urgency provided sion, spreading fi rst to the inner ring of early the background to address both claims at 20th-century working-class suburbs and the same time, as again, a round of discur- then also to the more wealthy suburban sive reinvention and intense institutional districts, even beyond the city borders (de re-organisation at both the Flemish and the Maesschalck and Loopmans, 2003; Billiet local levels was deemed necessary to curb the and de Witte, 2001). Schuermans and de electoral crisis (Stad Antwerpen, 2001). Under Maesschalck (2007) show how, since 1999, local pressure, a new, more entrepreneurial support for the party has been growing City Fund replaced the SIF in 2003. The SIF much faster in suburban and rural munici- was criticised for its social focus, not provid- palities than in inner-city districts. A ‘coal- ing any leverage for collaboration with ition of the last chance’ was set up in 2000, economic actors and focusing too much on incorporating all parties of the political the poor. It had largely neglected the middle spectrum apart from the extreme right. Its classes and the potential for urban renewal governing has been marked by an acute sense that lies enclosed in their aspirations for of urgency as the extreme right came very gentrifi cation. Moreover, the SIF had failed close to holding an absolute majority of votes. in its underlying rationale: to undermine Hence pressure was even higher to take new the electoral base of the extreme right. With initiatives. the new City Fund, a new urban policy dis- Before these elections, autochthonous course could be constructed, focusing on upper-working and middle-class active resid- ‘opportunities’ instead of ‘problems’. ‘Live- ents groups that gained more legitimacy ability’—which remained the core concept— under SIF had already been bringing up was now equated with “a safe, attractive and —with ever more assertiveness—‘safety vibrant urban environment” to be measured questions’, such as street prostitution, drug by its “attractiveness to higher-income groups” dealing, rack-renting, illegal dumping and (Loopmans, 2007). the presence of illegal immigrants, which the In Antwerp, supervision of the urban social approach of the SIF had not been able development budget was taken away from to tackle (Bewonersgroepencongres, 1997; the Social Affairs Alderman and returned Stad Antwerpen and Gazet van Antwerpen, to the Alderman for Urban Development

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22510510 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:192:21:19 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2511

and Planning. The city’s ‘planning cell’ was Antwerp North ... It must be possible to send reinforced with young and creative profes- out more police forces in the neighbourhood sionals (Christiaens et al., 2007) and two new to meet the demands of security from project institutions were established. On the one developers (Gazet van Antwerpen, 2005). hand, there is the semi-autonomous Real Very little protest was pitched against these Estate and Urban Development Company statements; instead, the dominant network Antwerp (Vastgoed- En Stadsontwikkelings of (White, mostly middle-class) active local bedrijf Antwerpen, hereafter VESPA), which residents in Antwerp North proclaimed that took over the task of co-ordinating urban they were eagerly waiting for a more ‘liveable’ development programmes from SOMA in neighbourhood. Citing Zuid as the desit- an explicit attempt to obtain closer collabor- able neighbourhood type, they made no secret ation with private real-estate agents operating of their wishes to replace more marginalised in the city (for instance, by drawing some of groups by middle-class gentrifi ers (de Bilzen, its employees directly from private real-estate 2002; 2006)2. A kind of liveability now pre- companies). On the other hand, there is a new vails which market parties, according to the cell for ‘Integral Security’, under the equally Alderman, were merely waiting to provide— new Alderman for Integral Security, which in collaboration with the city. Liveability, in a should work on the social aspects of urban somewhat revanchist guise, fi nally succeeds in development, but from a more ‘policing’ providing a coherent framework for all actors instead of ‘caring’ perspective and largely involved in urban development. Moreover, funded by the federal safety funds. through VESPA, the city of Antwerp has fi n- These new structures, under the pressure of ally found a vehicle to re-establish itself as an ever more tilting electoral power balance, an active and leading investor, combining succeed in responding to both local resident the co-ordination of major supralocal urban groups’ claims for ‘liveability’ and the quest policy funds with the tasks of valorising the of private investors for ‘profi table opportun- city’s own unused patrimony (more than 900 ities’ for housing investment. Uncivil behavi- buildings in the portfolio, often at strategic our lying at the basis of ‘liveability’ in its current locations, for an estimated value of 113 mil- sense, is now tackled more with repression lion euro; in addition VESPA lets out about instead of care. The Integral Security cell, 1400 units in 2006), of developing its own together with a more community-oriented building and renovation projects (155 build- local police and sanitation department, take ings in its 2006 portfolio, 62 more being on an increasingly proactive approach to- realised), and of organising major public– wards street and window prostitutes, drug private partnership projects (30 major pro- addicts and illegal immigrants subject to rack- jects, affecting a whole building block, in 2006) renting in slum housing (Stad Antwerpen, (AG VESPA, 2007). 2005). Where deemed necessary, they are The power to co-ordinate is revealed by driven off the streets and eliminated from the increasing number of building projects the neighbourhood, to be “replaced by better with which the city is willing and able to people”, as the Alderman for Integral Security identify itself; again, as in the modernist bluntly stated in a public hearing in Antwerp- period, public and private sectors are investing North, if necessary by force in the same areas, if not in the same projects: the is willing to provide for more one of the main instruments the city uses security measures where real estate actors today for urban development is the ‘build- demand this as a condition before investing in ing block project’ where a whole building

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22511511 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:202:21:20 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2512 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

block is being readjusted and revalorised in 35 per cent, a result which his party had not collaboration with the various public and been able to reach since 1976. So far, few stu- private landowners (Pittillion et al., 2005). dies have been published on the 2006 local The renewed focus on construction in urban elections, but preliminary research notes have policy has not gone unnoticed by the wider pointed out two important phenomena. First, public, as is revealed by the current mayor easier access to Belgian nationality and access Patrick Janssens’ local nickname ‘the brick to municipal elections for non-nationals have mayor’. increased the electorate of foreign origin, His approach is successfully legitimised which, obviously, has negatively affected the with the promise of more liveable neigh- results of the Vlaams Blok in the 19th-century bourhoods born with the arrival of ‘better’ districts where residents of foreign origin are residents. In his electoral campaign for the well represented (Hertogen, 2006). Secondly, municipal elections of 2006, mayor Janssens Janssens’ personal campaign has had a strong put a lot of emphasis on his ‘grands travaux’ positive impact on the social-democrat party for the city and how these have made Antwerp results. Focusing on the young urban profes- a more pleasant place to live in—in addition sionals he has been so keen to attract to the to several complimentary articles through city and who also predominantly settled in the more regular channels of newspapers the 19th-century area (replacing an older and lifestyle magazines, both mayor and working-class population), Janssens suc- vice-mayor have published a series of books ceeded in drawing voters away from other about their ‘realisations’ (Janssens, 2005, more traditional ‘gentrifi er parties’ like the 2006; van Campenhout, 2006)—and the local greens (Groen!) and the liberals (VLD) (van ‘new urban’ jet-set of pop icons, artists and Aelst et al., 2006). media-characters overtly supported him in a While it may be too early to speak of an poster campaign. It turned out to be a good established hegemony, it is clear that the strategy: previously, the Vlaams Belang had latest hegemonic project deploying the con- been able to set the terms of the campaign. cept of state-supported gentrification has In 2006, the party’s leader Filip Dewinter the best chances of developing into hegem- tried to incorporate Janssens’ major urban ony since the modernist project. This project development projects as ‘urban diamonds’ is furthered now by strongly profession- into his own electoral strategy and explicitly alised real-estate developers (mostly local supported the mayor’s policy of attracting companies which have been merged or inte- (White) middle-class residents, proclaiming grated with multinational real-estate actors), it not just a socioeconomic, but also an ethnic a polity focused on and experienced in phy- reconquest of the central city (Dewinter, 2006). sical urban development (headed by VESPA It was mainly Janssens who profi ted elector- and major Janssens) and the activist part of ally from this new discourse: for the first the population—i.e. the hundreds of upper- time in 30 years, the main opposition party working-class and middle-class resident Vlaams Belang did not make any electoral committees—mobilised for a more liveable progress in the city (a rising percentage of city. Gentrifi cation has become the key word votes in the peripheral districts of the pre- and to co-ordinate both public and private in- post-war suburbs was offset by a loss in the vestment activities in the city and is strongly 19th-century belt), whereas mayor Janssens’ supported by the wider public, as is revealed own social-democrats increased their share not only by the relative lack of organised of the votes by more than 15 per cent to over protest (even Vlaams Belang supports the

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22512512 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:202:21:20 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2513

road taken), but equally by the spectacularly planning department was the fi rst to come strong electoral support for the mayor and up with a renewed approach to urban policy. his party in the latest elections. However, the incorporation of grassroots claims in their discourse prevented a renewed Conclusion collaboration with the private sector and, as they largely neglected the social dimensions Analysing the development of state-supported of the liveability problem, legitimacy was gentrification in Antwerp from a neo- soon lost as well. In their wake, new organisa- Gramscian perspective reveals how these tions developed equally aspiring for a more policies are intensely connected to local pol- central position. SAS, which focused on the itical and social struggles and shows how the co-ordination issue, did not live long. How- sequence of policy shifts culminating in the ever, the BOM-SOMA approach, under the present gentrifi cation policies can be regarded auspices of the Social Affairs Alderman suc- as reactions to problems of legitimacy and ceeded in taking up a more established pos- co-ordination in the fi eld of urban policies. ition. Liveability is now interpreted in a more In Antwerp, the history of gentrifi cation as a integrated manner, focusing on the social hegemonic project can be traced back to the dimensions too, and this approach lives up crisis of modernist hegemony in urban devel- more to the demands of the participating opment (Table 1). This crisis revealed itself residents. Yet focusing on the most deprived fi rst in a decreasing legitimacy for the major areas and populations, it fails to lure in the urban renewal projects that it spawned, in private sector and obtain a co-ordinating role. particular in the inner cities. Instead, activists Consequently, visible results are meagre. As from various stances (conservationists pro- the growing safety concerns voiced by active testing against the destruction of historical residents and the Vlaams Blok are equally monuments, feminists reclaiming public ignored, the programme steadily loses its space for children instead of cars, inner-city legitimacy as well. shopkeepers bemoaning the loss of local In a fi nal phase, VESPA appears as a new residents as clients and progressive intellec- key organisation. Focusing on gentrifi cation tuals and artists aiming to revamp the creative (framed as the attraction of ‘better’ resid- underground spirit of the city) came up with ents to the city) as a more durable solution to a new alternative discourse focusing on the the multidimensional problem of liveability ‘liveability’ of the city and reclaiming the and concentrating purposively on the more city for the residential function. Whereas opportunity-rich areas with depreciated, but it troubled the coalition between state and valuable 19th-century bourgeois mansions private-sector construction companies (which and warehouses, such as the Haussmannised was given the fi nal blow by the 1970s eco- zone bordering the more deprived, homo- nomic crisis), a true counter-hegemony was geneous working-class areas, it succeeds in not established. re-establishing a common ground with the Instead, parts of the ‘liveability’ discourse private real-estate sector and acts as the co- have been incorporated in ensuing attempts ordinating organisation for all urban devel- to re-establish hegemony. Almost immediately, opment activities. With safety now also taken new organisations on the fringes of the city’s serious as a policy issue, connected to the goal bureaucracy set themselves up as the central of gentrification, and with the enhanced brokers of a new hegemonic project. In an liveability of already-gentrified areas act- experimental phase, the newly developed ing as a lure for aspiring residents in other

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22513513 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:202:21:20 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2514 MAARTEN LOOPMANS t tability of the endeavour OK, very effective collaboration collaboration very effective OK, and real-estate VESPA between and focusing on same sector, areas Problematic as the focus was Problematic on social welfare very much was and public investment in the most concentrated neighbourhoods; problematic no opportunity saw sector private for profi a result ofa result a lack of trust in the profi Problematic as the local state as the local state Problematic out the keep to attempts sector, real-estate professional other areas turns which to Problematic, the local state is the local state Problematic, divided with and collaboration problematic sector estate real rst, then rst, then problematised rst, OK so far, strong support strong for it OK so far, in gentrifying neighbourhoods results) in electoral (as revealed and hope in others OK at fi because lack of to attention in safety and problems of bad state addressing private housing market Problematic from the start from Problematic as but problematic Promising Succesful at fi Succesful of as problems problematic immigration and social cohesion ignored become Problematic, various social Problematic, of as promise protesting groups for all is perverted a by welfare ofdecrease for those liveability living in the inner city tability through through tability opportunities for residential urban development physical problems in particular problems physical neighbourhoods and profi collaboration Re-establish liveable inner liveable Re-establish alone cities for residents Welfare for all through a for all through Welfare rational modernisation of the city VESPA on safety and Focus BOM-SOMA and economic on social, Focus SAS quality architectural Combine Planning department Public works works Public department Antwerp, 1970–2007 Hegemonic phases in cation policy cation Gentrifi phase (2003–present) Social urban policy (1990–2003) Experimental phase (1983–90) Table 1. Table PhaseCataclystic phase (1971–83) organisations Core Discourse Legitimation Co-ordination

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22514514 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:212:21:21 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2515

neighbourhoods, the gentrifi cation policies non-hegemonic times, critical scholars have of VESPA also succeed in securing legitimacy been able directly to ‘whisper in the mayor’s from the local electorate. ear’: desperately seeking for a new hegemonic A neo-Gramscian analysis of this kind project, policy-makers were indeed relatively does not only help us to reach a better under- receptive to the advice of the highly critical standing of the current relation between planning department or to the analyses of the public policy and gentrifi cation in Antwerp, BOM-partners in the non-hegemonic 1980s it also provides valuable strategic insights and 1990s. However, the operational success for scholars seeking to deploy spaces of relev- of and the widespread electoral support for ance. In particular, Gramsci’s writings on the the current gentrification approach puts strategic dimensions of hegemonic struggles policy-makers in a more comfortable position can be of interest. First of all, this approach with little pressure to seek out new policy suggests not to look for generic strategies to formulas and hence such openness to criti- enhance policy relevance, but to take into ac- cism cannot be expected today. count the local social and political context; Therefore, Gramsci’s writings suggest, it even though studies suggest that gentrifi cation might be more wise to engage in a ‘war of policies are on the rise world-wide, this does position’, trying to strengthen those social not mean that they all occur under similar groups that are disaffected by the policies. social and political conditions. Rotterdam, Indeed, in Antwerp, signals exist that very for instance, reveals a similar path towards diverse social groups are negatively affected, gentrifi cation policies. However, the impetus in different ways, by these policies, but their in Antwerp for hegemonic struggle has been protests remain highly fragmented and go much more the legitimacy issue, whereas in largely unnoticed. These are not confi ned to Rotterdam, with a stronger bureaucracy, co- the most evident victims, those who are being ordination problems have played a stronger displaced or see their choice in the housing role in driving the search for a new hegemony market further restricted to ever-lower-quality (Uitermark et al., 2007; Beaumont and housing for an ever-increasing price. They Loopmans, 2008). Hence other fi elds will need might for instance be linked to conservation- to be explored to increase relevance. ist groups, who are increasingly critical of In particular, it has been suggested taking the fact that gentrifi cation often entails new- into account whether or not a hegemonic situ- built development in valuable historical ation exists; it is not a given that gentrifi cation parts of the city. There is a lot of work to do policies will underpin a local hegemony for gentrifi cation researchers in empower- everywhere. It is likely that these strategies ing various groups. Today, few of these groups will not fi nd such strong legitimacy amongst produce a coherent story within which to the population or that they will not always frame their discontent and gentrification enhance co-ordination within the governance students can do a lot here by providing well- network. If indeed a local hegemony is the developed analyses of the interrelations be- condition we are working in, as it appears tween their disparate experiences and the to be in Antwerp, we might take Gramsci’s process of state-supported gentrifi cation; such warning seriously that a head-on war of analyses might strengthen their claims and manoeuvres, approaching key policy-makers help them to build—perhaps unexpected— with highly critical ideas about the policy coalitions which might severely undercut choices they have made, is not the proper the legitimacy of gentrifi cation policies as approach for the moment. The story presented they are today. Of course, this is not just a here has revealed how, at certain moments in matter of dissemination of results but equally

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22515515 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:212:21:21 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2516 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

involves strategically choosing subjects of Justus Uitermark, Ben de Rudder, Jef van den study which might provide powerful discurs- Broeck, Pascal de Decker and Justin Beaumont ive weapons for those groups rejecting gen- and three anonymous reviewers. trifi cation as a solution to their problems. Yet critical students of gentrifi cation need References not stop there. Apart from unsettling the legitimacy of gentrifi cation, there is a lot of Aelst, P. van, Nuytemans, M. and Walgraeve, S. (2006) De verkiezingscampagne van 2006: work to do on the co-ordination side as well. onderzoeksnota [The electoral campaign of 2006: Today, the co-ordination power of the gen- a research note]. . trifi cation discourse rests with the belief that AG VESPA (2007) Jaarverslag 2006. AG VESPA, gentrifi cation policies could bring profi table Antwerp. and liveable neighbourhoods everywhere, Badcock, B. (2001) Thirty years on: gentrifi cation for everyone. Critical analyses of this belief and class change-over in Adelaide’s inner might increase insight into who benefits suburbs, 1966–1996, Urban Studies, 38, from the policies and who does not and will pp. 1559–1572. possibly reveal unfounded optimism from Beaumont, J. and Loopmans, M. (2008) Towards the side of some of the partners involved and radicalized communicative rationality: resid- ent involvement and urban democracy in decrease their willingness to collaborate. Rotterdam and Antwerp, International Journal Finally, apart from undermining the for Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), legitimacy and co-ordinating power of cur- pp. 95–113. rent gentrifi cation policies, the even more Beaumont, J., Loopmans, M. and Uitermark, J. important job of constructing a more viable (2005) Politicization of research and the relev- alternative remains: to imagine and develop ance of geography: some experiences and new vibrant urban policy scenarios which refl ections for an ongoing debate, Area, 37(1), might draw the necessary public support pp. 118–126. and enable the suffi ciently strong enough Bewonersgroepencongres (1997) Wijk in de kering, bewonersgroepencongres [Changing neigh- co-ordination of core organisations to con- bourhood, resident group congress] 18 April, stitute an alternative hegemony, without unpublished document, Antwerp. pro-ducing the negative social externalities Billiet, J. and Witte, H. de (2001) Wie stemde in and inequalities so often caused by gentrifi - Juni 1999 voor het Vlaams Blok en waarom? cation. This might well prove the most chal- [Who voted Vlaams Blok in June 1999 and lenging task lying ahead of us. why?], Tijdschrift voor Sociologie, 22(1), pp. 5–36. Notes Blanc, M. (2000) La recherche et l’action: un couple heureux?, Espaces et Sociétés, 30(101/102), pp. 1. Remark made by Jef van den Broeck, spatial 17–34. planner and former SAS member. Boudry, L., Coninck, M. de, Fret, L. et al. 2. A sole exception was Basta!, a committee (1999) Sociale, stedelijke en bestuurlijke ont- dominated by working-class political activists wikkeling? Een tussentijdse SIF-Balans [Social, pleading against all forms of nuisance but urban and governmental development? rejecting the gentrifi cation road as they feared An intermediate evaluation of SIF], Alert, 25, displacement (see Loopmans, 2006). pp. 21–48. Buyck, J. (1988) De jaren ’60 van zero tot Acknowledgements VAGA [The sixties from zero to VAGA], in: J. Weverbergh (Ed.) Antwerpen: De Jaren 60 The author wishes to acknowledge the helpful [Antwerp: the sixties], pp. 181–202. Schoten: comments on earlier versions of this paper by Hadewijch.

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22516516 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:212:21:21 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2517

Campenhout, L. van (2006) Dromen is Durven Dorling, D. and Shaw, M. (2002) Geographies of [To dream is to dare]. Antwerpen: BMP. the agenda: public policy, the discipline and Carnoy, M. (1984) Gramsci and the state, in: its (re)turns, Progress in Human Geography, 26, M. Carnoy (Ed.) The State and Political Theory, pp. 627–646. pp. 65–88. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Dutt, A. and Costa, F. (Eds) (1992) Perspectives on Press. Planning and Urban Development in Belgium. Ceuppens, A. (1981) Evolutie van de Sociale Dordrecht: Springer. Woningbouw te Antwerpen [The evolution of Gazet van Antwerpen (2005) Grootjans gaat in social housing in Antwerp]. Gent: RUG. op vraag projectontwikkelaars [Grootjans Christiaens, E., Moulaert, F. and Bosmans, B. responds to project developers’ demands], 10 (2007) The end of social innovation in urban November (http://antwerpen.gva.be/nieuws- development strategies? The case of Antwerp antwerpen/2005/11/10/grootjans-gaat-in- and the neighbourhood development asso- op-vraag-projectontwikkelaars-antwerpen. ciation BOM, European Urban and Regional html; accessed 23 March 2007). Studies, 14(3), pp. 238–251. Gill, S. (2003) Power and Resistance in the New Coninck, M. de and Vandenberghe, J. (1996) Het World Order. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. sociaal impulsfonds: een instrument voor het Gramsci, A. (1975/2001) Quaderni del Carcere stedelijk beleid [The social impulse fund: an [Prison notebooks]. Turin: Einaudi. instrument for urban policy]. Ministerie van Hackworth, J. and Smith, N. (2001) The changing de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, Brussels. state of gentrifi cation, Tijdschrift voor Econo- Cools, B. (1994) In Naam van de Stad [In the name mische en Sociale Geografi e 92(4), pp. 464–477. of the city]. Antwerp-Baarn: Hadewijch. Herck, K. van and Avermaete, T. (2006) Wonen in Cox, R. (1983) Gramsci, hegemony, and inter- Welvaart, 1945–1973 [Good living, 1945–1973]. national relations: an essay in method, in: Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010. R. Cox and T. Sinclair (Eds) Approaches to Hertogen, J. (2006) Allochtonen redden dem- World Order, pp. 124–143. Cambridge: ocratie in Antwerpen [Allochtoneous save Cambridge University Press. democracy in Antwerp], BuG 36, NPData, De Bilzen (2002) Marshallplan voor Antwerpen- Brussels. Noord [Marshall plan for Antwerp-North]. Hoefnagels, C. (2004) Theoretisch en empirisch Unpublished document, Antwerp. onderzoek naar gentrifi cation in Antwerpen De Bilzen (2006) Marshallplan voor Antwerpen- [Theoretical and empirical study on gentrifi - Noord [Marshall plan for Antwerp-North]. cation in Antwerp]. Unpublished MA thesis, Unpublished document, Antwerp. Erasmus University Rotterdam. Decker, P. de (1994a) Het herwaarderingsbesluit Hove, E. van (2001) Networking Neighbourhoods. geherwaardeerd? [Renewing the renewal decree?], Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Ruimtelijke Planning, 2, pp. 85–93. Press. Decker, P. de (1994b) Plangroep stad aan de stroom Imrie, R. (2004) Urban geography, relevance and stopt [Plan group the city and the stream stops], resistance to the ‘policy turn’, Urban Geography, Planologisch Nieuws, 14, pp. 74–77. 25(8), pp. 697–708. Decker, P. de (1999) On the genesis of an urban Ives, P. (2004) Language and Hegemony in Gramsci. policy in Flanders, Belgium, Journal of Housing London: Pluto Press. and the Built Environment, 14, pp. 183–190. Janssens, P. (2005) De Stad wor Azzek zen Gebore Decker, P. de, Kesteloot, C., Maesschalck, F. de [The city where I was born]. Antwerp: BMP. and Vranken, J. (2005) Revitalising the city in Janssens, P. (2006) Het Beste Moet Nog Komen [The an anti-urban context: extreme right and the Best is Yet to Come]. Antwerp: BMP. rise of urban policies in Flanders, Belgium, Jessop, B. (1990) State Theory: Putting the Capitalist International Journal of Urban and Regional State in Its Place. Pennsylvania, PA: Pennsylvania Research, 29, pp. 152–171. State University Press. Dewinter, F. (2006) Antwerpen Troef! [Antwerp Jessop, B. (1997) A neo-Gramscian approach to fi rst!]. Antwerpen: Uitgeverij Egmont. the regulation of urban regimes: accumulation

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22517517 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:212:21:21 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2518 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

strategies, hegemonic projects and governance, Maesschalck, F. de and Loopmans, M. (2002) in: M. Lauria (Ed.) Reconstructing Urban Regime Herverdeling van middelen en mensen [Re- Theory: Regulating Urban Politics in a Global distributing money and people], Rooilijn, Economy, pp. 51–73. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 35(3), pp. 120–125. Publications. Maesschalck, F. de and Loopmans, M. (2003) Jessop, B. (2002a) The Future of the Capitalist Electoral geography and manifestos of new State. Cambridge: Polity Press. urban parties from 1977–1999: how urban are Jessop, B. (2002b) The political scene and the they really?, Belgeo, 3, pp. 329–342. politics of representation: periodising class Martin, R. (2001) Geography and public policy: struggle and the state in the eighteenth Brumaire, the case of the missing agenda, Progress in in: M. Cowling and J. Martin (Eds) Marx’s Human Geography, 25, pp. 189–210. Eighteenth Brumaire: (Post-)modern Interpret- Martin, R. (2002) Response to Dorling and Shaw, ations, pp. 179–194. London: Pluto Press. Progress in Human Geography, 26, pp. 627–646. Jessop, B. (2005) Gramsci as a spatial theorist, Massey, D. (2000) Editorial: practising political Critical Review of International Social and Pol- relevance, Transactions of the Institute of British itical Philosophy, 8, pp. 421–437. Geographers, 25, pp. 131–133. Lauwers, L. (2008) Verhuiseffecten van stadsont- Massey, D. (2001) The Progress in Human Geo- wikkeling in Antwerpen: een kwantitatief onderzoek graphy lecture: geography on the agenda, naar intrastedelijke migratiepatronen [Displace- Progress in Human Geography, 25, pp. 5–17. ment through urban development in Antwerp: Massey, D. (2002) Response to Dorling and Shaw, a quantitative analysis of intra-urban migration Progress in Human Geography, 26, pp. 627–646. patterns]. Unpublished MA thesis, Free Uni- Meulder, B. de (2006) De Belgische stedenbouw versity of Brussels. en de belofte van welvaart 1945–1975: 10 punten Lees, L. (2000) A reappraisal of gentrifi cation: over de veranderende productie van het towards a ‘geography of gentrifi cation’, Progress wonen [Belgian urban development and the in Human Geography, 24(3), pp. 389–408. promise of welfare 1945–1975: 10 remarks Lees, L. (2003) Policy (re-)turn: gentrifi cation on the changing production of housing], in: research and urban policy—urban policy K. van Herck and T. Avermaete (Eds) Wonen in and gentrifi cation research, Environment and Welvaart, 1945–1973, pp. 128–145. Rotterdam: Planning A, 35, pp. 571–574. Uitgeverij 010. Loopmans, M. (2006a) From residents to Moulaert, F. (2000) Globalisation and Integrated neighbours: the making of active citizens in Area Development in European Cities. Oxford: Antwerp, Belgium, in: J. W. Duyvendak, T. Oxford University Press. Knijn and M. Kremer (Eds) Policy, People, and Pacione, M. (1999) Relevance in human geography the New Professional: De-professionalisation —special collection of invited papers: guest and Re-professionalisation in Care and Welfare, editorial, Scottish Geographical Journal, 115, pp. 109–121. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University pp. v–xiv. Press. Pain, R. (2006) Social geography: seven deadly Loopmans, M. (2006b) Ondernemende burgers myths in policy research, Progress in Human in ondernemende steden [Entrepreneurial Geography, 30, pp. 250–259. citizens in entrepreneurial cities], Agora, 22(4), Pittillion, F., Wuyts, T. and Acker, M. van (2005) pp. 19–22. Bouwblokprojecten in Antwerpen [Building Loopmans, M. (2007) From SIF to city fund: a block projects in Antwerp]. Stad Antwerpen new direction for urban policy in Flanders, and Henri van de Velde Institute, Antwerp. Belgium, Journal for Housing and the Built Publiservice (1957) Antwerp today. Publiservice Environment, 22(2), pp. 215–225. S.C., Antwerp. Loopmans, M., Uitermark, J. and Maesschalck, Sanders, C. (1986) Recente ontwikkelingen in de F. de (2003) Against all odds: poor people kantoorsector toegepast op Antwerpen [Recent jumping scales and the development of an developments in the offi ce sector in Antwerp]. urban policy in Flanders, Belgium, Belgeo, Unpublished MA thesis, Catholic University 2(3), pp. 243–258. of Leuven.

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22518518 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:222:21:22 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack GENTRIFICATION IN ANTWERP 2519

Schelde-Dijle vzw (1971) Leidraad voor de Stad Antwerpen and Gazet Van Antwerpen (1998) ontwikkeling van de kernstad Antwerpen. Antwerpen: verhalen over buurten [Antwerp: Schelde-Dijle vzw, Antwerp. stories about neighbourhoods]. Stad Antwerpen. Schuermans, N. and Maesschalck, F. de (2007) Timmerman, G. (1994) De Uitverkoop van Antwerpen Extreem-rechts, etnocentrisme en onveilig- [Selling off Antwerp]. Berchem: EPO. heidsgevoelens op het Vlaamse platteland [The Toubhans, W. and Lombaerde, P. (1993) Antwerpen, extreme right, ethnocentrism and feelings of een moderne stad [Antwerp, a modern city], insecurity in the Flemish countryside], Ruimte in: E. Taverne and I. Visser (Eds) Stedebouw, en Planning, 27(2), pp. 10–27. de Geschiedenis van de Stad in de Nederlanden Slater, T. (2004) Municipally managed gen- van 1500 tot Heden [Urbanism, the history of trifi cation in South Parkdale, Toronto, The the city in the Low Countries since 1500], pp. Canadian Geographer, 48(3), pp. 303–325. 314–327. Nijmegen: SUN. Slater, T. (2006) The eviction of critical perspect- Uitermark, J., Duyvendak, J. W. and Kleinhans, ives from gentrifi cation research, International R. (2007) Gentrifi cation as a governmental Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30, strategy: social control and social cohesion pp. 737–757. in Hoogvliet, Rotterdam, Environment and Smit, K. de (2003) Hoe dol was Dolle Mina? De Planning A, 39, pp. 1125–1141. geschiedenis van de Dolle Mina’s in Vlaanderen Verhetsel, A. and Ceulemans, S. (1994) Stadsver- [How crazy were the Crazy Minas? The history nieuwing en speculatie op vastgoed: een of the Crazy Minas in Flanders]. Unpublished gevalstudie: Sint-Andrieskwartier-Antwerpen MA thesis, University of Ghent. [Urban renewal and real estate speculation: a Smith, N. (2002) New globalism, new urbanism: case study in the Antwerp Sint-Andries quarter], gentrifi cation as a global urban strategy, Anti- Planologisch Nieuws, 14(3), pp. 111–126. pode, 34, pp. 427–450. Verschueren, J. (2003) Plaats voor de homo ludens! Stad aan de Stroom (1990) Een opening in de stad: Vlaamse provo’s als nieuwe sociale beweging in bewonersverhalen voor de toekomst [Openings een ruimtelijk wereld-systeem-analytisch per- to the city: residents’ stories for the future]. spectief [Make way for the homo ludens! Flemish Stad aan de Stroom vzw, Antwerp. provo’s as a new social movement in a spatial Stad Antwerpen (1973) Binnenstad Antwerpen: world-system perspective]. Unpublished MA structuurschets [Structure plan for the Antwerp thesis, University of Ghent. inner city]. Stad Antwerpen. Ward, K. (2005) Geography and public policy: a Stad Antwerpen (1978) Structuurschets zuid [Struc- recent history of ‘policy relevance’, Progress in ture plan for the south]. Stad Antwerpen. Human Geography, 29, pp. 310–319. Stad Antwerpen (1980) Structuurschets Stuiven- Ward, K. (2006) Geography and public policy: berg [Structure plan for Stuivenberg]. Stad towards public geographies, Progress in Human Antwerpen. Geography, 30, pp. 495–503. Stad Antwerpen (1985) Activiteitenverslag 1983– Weesep, J. van (1994) Gentrifi cation as a research 1984–1985: planologie, huisvesting, milieu frontier, Progress in Human Geography, 18, [Activity report 1983–1984–1984: planning, pp. 74–83. housing and environment]. Stad Antwerpen. Wyly, L. and Hammel, D. (1999) Islands of decay Stad Antwerpen (1989) Zes jaar stadsvernieuwing: de in seas of renewal: urban policy and the nieuwe kleren van mijn buurt [Six years of urban resurgence of gentrifi cation, Housing Policy renewal: new clothes for the neighbourhood]. Debate, 10, pp. 711–771. Stad Antwerpen. Wyly, L. and Hammel, D. (2001) Gentrifi cation, Stad Antwerpen (2001) Bestuursakkoord 2001–2006 housing policy, and the new context of urban [Government agreement 2001–2006]. Stad redevelopment, in: K. Fox-Gotham (Ed.) Antwerpen. Critical Perspectives on Urban Redevelopment, Stad Antwerpen (2005) Stadsplan veilig [Municipal pp. 211–276. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. security plan]. Stad Antwerpen.

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22519519 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:222:21:22 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack 2520 MAARTEN LOOPMANS

22499-2519499-2519 UUSJ_097107.inddSJ_097107.indd 22520520 99/2/2008/2/2008 2:21:222:21:22 PMPM PProcessrocess BlackBlack