Submitted Paper

Progress in Human Geography 1–18 Moving beyond Marcuse: ª The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines: Gentrification, displacement sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0309132519830511 and the violence of un-homing journals.sagepub.com/home/phg

Adam Elliott-Cooper King’s College , UK Phil Hubbard King’s College London, UK Loretta Lees University of Leicester, UK

Abstract Displacement has become one of the most prominent themes in contemporary geographical debates, used to describe processes of dispossession and forced eviction at a diverse range of scales. Given its frequent deployment in studies describing the consequences of gentrification, this paper seeks to better define and conceptualise displacement as a process of un-homing, noting that while gentrification can prompt processes of eviction, expulsion and exclusion operating at different scales and speeds, it always ruptures the con- nection between people and place. On this basis – and recognising displacement as a form of violence – this paper concludes that the diverse scales and temporalities of displacement need to be better elucidated so that their negative emotional, psychosocial and material impacts can be more fully documented, and resisted.

Keywords displacement, gentrification, housing, social exclusion, urban geography

I Introduction eviction characteristic of (settler) colonialism (Bonds and Inwood, 2016). But it is in the con- Displacement is now one of the most text of the ‘new urban enclosure’ and the forms frequently-invoked concepts in human geogra- of accumulation by dispossession associated phy, used to describe forms of enforced mobi- with urban neoliberalism that the term is most lity in a variety of contexts and at different frequently used (Hodkinson, 2012), with some spatial scales (Brickell et al., 2017). The term drawing important parallels between urban displays a degree of elasticity: frequently deployed when charting the consequences of natural disaster, wars or state terrorism (e.g. Corresponding author: Graif, 2016; Lunstrum, 2016; Oslender, 2016), Phil Hubbard, King’s College London, London, WC2B displacement is also seen as integral to the pro- 4BG, UK. cesses of ‘land grab’, expropriation and violent Email: [email protected] 2 Progress in Human Geography XX(X) displacement under racialised capitalism and neighbourhood (by urban renewal) and the trau- the seizure of land by settlers who ‘seek to matic stress reaction experienced by those replace an entire system of ownership with affected – something akin to the ‘slow violence’ another’ (Wolfe, 2016: 34; see also Smith, of housing dispossession described by Pain 2002; Fullilove, 2004; Jackson, 2017). (2019) when detailing the urban trauma that can Such possible connections are deeply- become ‘hard-wired’ in place. suggestive of the value of displacement as a While all these terms connote forms of dis- motif in contemporary urban geography, one possession and carry with them significantly that links to important notions of social and negative overtones, in this paper we suggest that spatial justice. As Delaney (2004: 848) writes: they are neither precise enough, not sufficiently encompassing, to capture the range of displace- Displacement is a useful concept. It gathers ments that occur in the context of urban gentri- together and generalizes across a range of what fication. While we recognise that not all urban may otherwise be dissimilar events and experi- displacements are associated with processes of ences, highlighting shared elements. In an age gentrification (Smart and Smart, 2017), and that that commonly celebrates hypermobility as the some argue that gentrification does not cause embodied emblem of freedom, displacement displacement in each and every case (Freeman, focuses on mobility as coerced, as against the will or wishes of subjects. Displacement can be seen 2005), the concept of displacement is now as a mode of de-subjectification insofar as the invoked with such regularity in studies of urban bodies of the displaced are seen as objects oper- gentrification that there can be no doubt that ated on by outside hostile forces. gentrification and displacement are linked. However, the specification of this relationship Yet at the same time, the pliability of the term remains a major priority: too often displacement and its deployment in a wide variety of contexts remains under-theorised and poorly specified in means it is in danger of becoming a classic gentrification studies (Baeten et al., 2017). ‘chaotic’ concept: a notion that actually In this paper we argue that we need to work obscures as much as it reveals. with a more rigorous conceptualisation of dis- This is readily-apparent in the literature on placement that is, at the same time, inclusive urban gentrification. Here, gentrification scholars enough to consider the variety of forms it takes regularly refer to displacement, but equally apply in the context of contemporary urban gentrifica- a variety of overlapping and related concepts that tions. In doing so we argue that gentrification they sometimes appear to regard as synonymous. studies needs to move beyond Marcuse’s (1986) For example, ‘domicide’ (Porteous and Smith, now-classic conceptualisation of displacement 2001) refers to the planned, intentional destruc- as something that happens when a neighbour- tion of someone’s home, but it is a term that does hood gets too expensive for the poor. While not appear applicable to all gentrification- Marcuse’s conceptualisation of the relations induced displacement given the latter is not between abandonment, displacement and gen- always planned or wilful. In related work, Porte- trification has been a beacon guiding research ous (1988) talked of the ‘topocide’ occurring on gentrification-induced displacement, we when the memory of a place is obliterated, argue that it does not always speak to the dis- reminding us of the phenomenological dimen- placements being experienced in the 21st cen- sions of displacement, but through a concept that tury, especially those state-led gentrifications does not necessarily speak to the displacement of occurring outside the Global North. Nor, we individual households. ‘Root-shock’ (Fullilove, argue, does his emphasis on land value help us 2004) likewise refers to the destruction of a understand the phenomenological or affective Elliott-Cooper et al. 3 dimensions of displacement, and the anger and work, Friedrich Engels’ The Housing Question despair that is inherent to its experience. Mar- noted that housing speculation had particularly cuse’s conceptualisation – a view from 1980s negative consequences for working-class New York – was very much a product of its time residents: (see Slater, 2009). In this review, we hence develop Atkinson’s The result is that the workers are forced out of the (2015: 376) conceptualisation of displacement centre of the towns towards the outskirts; that as a process of un-homing that severs the links workers’ dwellings, and small dwellings in between residents and the communities to general, become rare and expensive and often altogether unobtainable, for under these circum- which they belong, something registered stances the building industry, which is offered a through a range of modalities, including experi- much better field for speculation by more ential, financial, social, familial and ecological. expensive dwelling houses, builds workers’ InsodoingwealsoextendBrickelletal.’s dwellings only by way of exception. (Engels, (2017) work, which argues that displacement 1975 [1872]: 18) needs to be considered as an affective, emo- tional and material rupture. The structure of our This positions displacement as an inevitable paper proceeds as follows. In the first section, consequence of uneven development, with the the paper explores the relationship between displacement of poorer populations by richer gentrification and displacement, establishing ones tied in to the rhythms of capital investment. displacement as a defining feature of gentrifica- These investments ebb and flow in periods of tion. Secondly, we consider why displacement economic boom and slump, with accumulation matters by addressing the harms associated with by dispossession accelerating these processes, displacement, identifying it as a form of un- scaling up both displacement and investment homing that violently severs the connection (Harvey, 2004; Glassman, 2006; Zhang and between people and place, undermining the He, 2018). In the last decade in particular, the right to dwell. In the final section, we move to extent and scale of gentrification-induced dis- consider how such questions intersect with placement has become increasingly apparent questions of speed and slowness, noting that with the suburbanisation of poverty noted in measuring displacement – and diagnosing its many cities thought to be driven by low- impacts – can differ depending on the temporal income residents moving out from central cities as well as spatial horizons invoked. that are no longer affordable to them (Hochsten- bach and Musterd, 2018). Indeed it is due to this displacement that gentrification has come to be II Displacement in the context of seen as a socially unjust, and essentially nega- gentrification tive, process. In the contemporary remaking of Displacement has arguably been a defining fea- cities, elites conscious of the negative connota- ture of gentrification since Glass (1964) first tions of the term ‘gentrification’ never use it, coined the term. As she stated: ‘Altogether there instead obfuscating it with more positively- has been a great deal of displacement ...All loaded terms like urban regeneration, renais- those who cannot hold their own – the small sance, renewal, or redevelopment. enterprises, the lower ranks of people, the odd This noted, work in gentrification studies has men out – are being pushed away’ (Glass, 1964: historically tended to focus on middle-class xxv–xxvi). Of course, consideration of displace- gentrifiers and the production of gentrified liv- ment at the neighbourhood scale has a longer ing spaces (Slater et al., 2004; Paton, 2014; provenance: almost a century before Glass’s Huse, 2014), rather than the consequences of 4 Progress in Human Geography XX(X) this for low-income groups. Helbrecht (2017: 2) The latter form of ‘gentrification by mass hence describes the gentrification literature as eviction’ has been identified as one of the most ‘a one-eyed cyclops that operates with an enor- significant processes affecting the lives of the mous intellectual bias because it observes only urban poor in the Global South (Desmond, the upgrading aspect of the gentrification pro- 2012: 90), especially in favelas and slums where cess while ignoring displacement’. Displace- the state or NGOs have made infrastructure ment has then been described as the ‘dark investments (Cummings, 2015). What has been side’ of gentrification (Baeten et al., 2017: termed ‘mega displacement’ is manifest in 645), an observation that begs a more detailed many emerging economies – including India, investigation of the different forms and modal- Indonesia and Malaysia – on a scale which is ities of gentrification-induced displacement. yet to be witnessed in the Global North (see But displacement appears much harder to Lees et al., 2016). Given resettlement rights are detect than gentrification, with Bernt and Holm often insecure in such contexts, transport infra- (2009) suggesting that whether or not displace- structure unreliable, and vital services less ment is diagnosed in a particular context is accessible outside the city, eviction can often largely dependent on how it is being looked for. be highly disruptive for those affected. Some Zuk et al. (2018: 35) concur, arguing that we have questioned whether such displacements desperately need ‘advanced tools to define and should be referred to as gentrification per se measure these analytically distinct phenomena’. (Ghertner, 2014), but emergent comparative In part this is because it is difficult to distinguish work suggests that there are important common- between forced and voluntary mobility at an alities between such ‘clearances’ in the Global intra-urban scale. Even in long-established and South and programmes of ‘urban renewal’ in the settled communities, population churn is a nor- Global North (Ascensa˜o, 2015; Lees et al., mal fact of life. Properties are routinely sold – 2016; Shin and Lopez-Morales, 2018). usually to those of similar socio-economic sta- But given that gentrification can also involve tus – or rented to new occupiers at similar rent more subtle processes of cultural appropriation when others leave. Some of this churn might be and symbolic violence, processes of displace- enforced – such as when a house is repossessed ment are not always as obvious as these mass through failure to keep up mortgage payments evictions imply (Hern, 2016; Janoschka and or a tenant is evicted from a rental property for Sequera, 2016). This was emphasised by Mar- rent arrears – but this is replacement rather than cuse (1986), who fleshed out the relations of displacement per se. However, individual evic- gentrification and displacement by suggesting tions can cumulatively pave the way for gentri- that gentrification is responsible not only for the fication if they provide the opportunity for those direct removal of low-income households via with different social and cultural dispositions to eviction, but also for forms of indirect displace- move into a given neighbourhood (Chum, ment where existing residents might not feel at 2015). Indeed, the displacement of a resident home anymore in a changing neighbourhood who is unable to pay their rent and their replace- because of the general decline of working- ment with a resident who can indicates a degree class culture and identity. As he argued: of economic differentiation between them. This situation can be contrasted with instances where [W]hen a family sees the neighbourhood around it multiple landlords or institutions expropriate changing dramatically, when their friends are housing en masse with the intention of increas- leaving the neighbourhood, when the stores they ing rental values, something that constitutes an patronise are liquidating and new stores for other obvious form of enforced displacement. clientele are taking their places, and when Elliott-Cooper et al. 5

changes in public facilities, in transportation pat- gentrification in inner city London presented terns, and in support services all clearly are mak- by Lyons (1996) and Atkinson (2000), arguing ing the area less and less livable, then the pressure that what was being seen was a ‘significant and of displacement is severe. (Marcuse, 1986: 207) consistent growth in the proportion of profes- sional and managerial groups and a significant Marcuse (1986) famously identified five and consistent decline in the size and proportion related processes of displacement, combining of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled manual economic, social and cultural processes, but workers’. As a result, Hamnett argued against also noting the distinction between last resident displacement in London, suggesting that ‘the and chain displacement, the former suggesting transformation which has taken place in the that displacement needs to be thought about in occupational class structure of London has been relation to the last occupier of a property associated with the gradual replacement of one whereas the latter is more open to the idea that class by another, rather than large-scale direct displacement of populations happens gradually displacement’ (Hamnett, 2003: 2424). and in the context of longer-term shifts. This However, this ‘replacement’ argument was observation is important inasmuch as commu- criticised by Slater (2006: 748), who argued nity expropriation and un-homing can occur at that, ‘in the absence of any numbers on displa- different speeds (see Section III). cement it appears that [Hamnett] is blanking out Nonetheless it remains unclear at what point the working class’ (see also Davidson and acts of individual un-homing can be described as Wyly, 2012). Likewise, Freeman’s (2005) oft- having given way to a more encompassing form cited assertion that poorer (black) residents of displacement that involves the erasure of an remain in situ in improving areas, and benefit entire community (Nowicki, 2014). This is from the activities of wealthier residents, has related to the question of when the social- been dismissed as based on anecdotal evidence economic character of an area has changed to (see Curran, 2007; Sullivan, 2007; McKinnish the extent that we can speak of gentrification et al., 2009). Slater (2006: 749) has also con- having occurred. This has been endlessly tested Freeman’s idea that people remain in debated, not least because it is hypothesised that place because they perceive that they will ben- significant socio-economic change in an area can efit from the gentrification occurring around occur without significant displacement occur- them, suggesting that if they stay this is ring. For example, there is a substantial body ‘because there are no feasible alternatives avail- of research arguing that incumbent upgrading – able to them in a tight/tightening housing mar- via moderate-income households improving ket’. Here Slater argues that even if some their own housing conditions – does not create working class residents remain in situ, this does significant displacement (see Johnson, 1983; not mean they are not experiencing ‘displace- Van Criekingen and Decroly, 2003). For exam- ment pressure’ (Marcuse, 1986). Summarising ple, in Owens’ (2012) study of US metropolitan such debates, Shaw (2008: 1702) concludes that change from 1970 to 2009, measures of house- ‘there are no serious studies demonstrating that hold income, educational attainment, occupation displacement does not occur at all’. type, rent, and house values were used to map Such observations also appear relevant in the neighbourhood ascent, with uplift appearing to context of ‘marginal gentrification’ (Rose, occur without significant population change in 1996; Van Criekingen and Decroly, 2003; many neighbourhoods, suggesting improvement Shaw, 2008), a process said to involve the arri- without displacement. Likewise, Hamnett val of a ‘well-educated but economically strug- (2003: 2406) refuted the evidence of gling avant-garde of artists, graduate students 6 Progress in Human Geography XX(X) and assorted bohemian and counter-cultural displacement. This tendency is also apparent types’ (Rose, 1996: 132) who renovate their in the context of studentification, which homes and the wider neighbourhood. In their involves the conversion of ‘family’ homes into study of Brussels, for example, Van Criekingen houses designed to accommodate groups of stu- and Decroly (2003) note that this involves a dents during term-time, usually through buy-to- change in the cultural status and reputation of rent schemes (Smith, 2004). Whilst in relative an area, improvements to the housing stock and terms the neighbourhood does not become more some social change, but not the emergence of a wealthy – as students tend to be rich in educa- particularly wealthy neighbourhood. For most tional and cultural capital, but not affluent – the commentators, such marginal gentrification is exclusionary displacement that results in such typically not associated with displacement (Van situations is often palpable, with services such Weesep, 1994; Billingham, 2017). However, if as schools, shops and pubs which had catered the area is ‘discovered’ by wealthier popula- for long-term residents often disappearing tions, developers and investors, it appears that (Allinson, 2006). considerable displacement pressures can The lack of agreement among researchers as emerge in time (Marcuse, 1986b). In other to the relationship between gentrification and words, this classical ‘first wave’ of gentrifica- displacement is particularly pronounced in the tion must be understood as being a potential context of new-build gentrification (see Smith, trigger for later waves of gentrification. Numer- 2002; Davidson and Lees, 2005, 2010; Boddy, ous examples of this process have been identi- 2007; Davidson, 2009). This is a form of gentri- fied, most notably in the context of artist-led fication that, in theory, does not entail displace- gentrification, with artists and creative workers ment, a conclusion drawn by Henig (1980: 648), locating in ‘gritty’ inner-city areas because of whose US studies led him to conclude that gen- cheap rents and affordable working spaces, trification does not necessarily lead to displace- lending a desirable cachet to the area which, ment if ‘the inwardly moving professionals are in time, they themselves are ‘priced out’ of moving into newly-built or previously vacant (Ley, 2003; Pratt, 2009a). In many cases this units’. However, Davidson and Lees (2005: process appears related to retail gentrification 1170) argue that new-build gentrification, even (Zukin et al, 2009; Hubbard, 2017). on ex-industrial, brownfield sites, undoubtedly Evidentially, debates on the relationship causes displacement, but that this displacement between displacement and marginal gentrifica- is likely to be ‘indirect’. Instead it is a form of tion involve some labyrinthine discussions of ‘exclusionary displacement’ where lower- whether those low in economic capital, but high income groups are unable to access property in social capital, should be described as mar- in those neighbouring areas falling under the ginal or apprentice gentrifiers – or even spoken shadow of gentrification. In this sense, new- of as gentrifiers at all (Smith, 2004; Watt, 2005). build gentrification makes working-class Examples include so-called ‘social preserva- residence in ‘improving’ neighbourhoods tionists’ – highly educated, residentially mobile increasingly untenable (Visser and Kotze, city-dwellers – who seek to preserve what they 2008; Kern, 2009; Rerat et al., 2010; He, 2010; consider to be ‘authentic’ social spaces (Brown- Rose, 2010; Doucet et al., 2011; Shaw and Saracino, 2004). Yet such spaces can be identi- Hagemans, 2015). This posits gentrification- fied by established communities – defined by induced displacement not simply as a form of class, ethnicity, age and culture – in a manner out-migration that corresponds to a concomi- that can be culturally essentialising, and hence tant in-migration: rather it suggests it involves actually provoke forms of exclusionary about multiple processes of un-homing which Elliott-Cooper et al. 7 raise important questions about socio-spatial ‘oppressing collective resistance, long meetings justice. to solicit agreement as well as intrusive visits to displacees’ homes, even their workplaces and schools’ (2018: 201), mirroring the state vio- III Un-homing and the violence lence more usually associated with geopolitical of displacement conflict. The above observations imply that it is displa- Putting violence front and central in discus- cement, rather than the revaluation of land per sions of displacement may seem extreme when, se, that lies at the heart of definitions of gentri- in some studies, the effects of displacement fication. Indeed, we would argue that some seem relatively benign. Young and Willmott’s degree of displacement is inevitable given that (1957) classic study of kinship in , gentrification severs links between people and for example, identified many individuals who the communities that they regard as their own actually found displacement to have a beneficial (see also Atkinson, 2015). While this can be impact on their lives, with an enforced move resisted, with some groups exhibiting ‘surviva- from the inner city to newly-constructed sub- bility’ in the face of gentrification (Lees et al., urbs nonetheless bringing them heating, running 2018), this posits displacement as an intensely- water, indoor toilets and multiple bedrooms. felt and experiential process of un-homing. This Longitudinal research in Glasgow by Kearns more expansive and inclusive conceptualisation and Mason (2013, 2015) likewise suggests that of displacement has, we argue, real purchase for there might be a difference in the ‘psychosocial’ gentrification studies as it combines both phys- impacts of displacement between those willing ical and psychological displacement, and allows to move and those who are reluctant displacees. us to more fully recognise the destruction of Reporting deleterious health outcomes for those phenomenological attachments to place and displaced from central Glasgow housing estates, home (Davidson, 2009). Here, the notion of their conclusion was that ‘most of those who un-homing is multi-scalar and stretches out moved considered that they had “bettered” their from the household to the street, neighbourhood residential conditions, though again less so in and the city beyond (Massey, 1992: 14; cf. Bax- neighbourhood than in dwelling terms’ (Kearns ter and Brickell, 2014, on home unmaking). and Mason, 2013: 195). The diagnosis and conceptualisation of The latter observation is important given the gentrification-induced displacement as a form argument that ‘working-class’ people are said to of severance allows us to look for different signs exhibit a phenomenological understanding of of displacement, with affected neighbourhoods their home and neighbourhood as a ‘comforta- and populations displaying the marks of wound- ble lived space’ rather than a financial invest- ing or trauma (Graham, 2008; Till, 2012; Pain, ment (Allen and Crookes, 2009; Davidson and 2019). Zhang (2018), for example, explicitly Lees, 2010). So even if displaced residents elucidates the violence of gentrification- receive the market value for their loss of prop- induced displacement in the context of urban erty, this suggests it is impossible to compensate redevelopment in China, with older residents them for the longing and isolation that are often comparing the processes of un-homing to their felt when their home is lost. In some cases, a experience of war, describing it as ‘fast, stress- new place may never feel truly like home, as no ful and chaotic’ (Zhang, 2018: 201). This expli- matter how many new friends are made or how cit link with the violence of war was also much better a new house may be, the memories reproduced in less obvious ways, with the local of their original home and neighbourhood will state engaged in tactics that included always remind the displaced of their loss (Jones, 8 Progress in Human Geography XX(X)

2015). The paradox here is then that the ‘objec- process. This study is one of very few that takes tive’ social good which derives from moving to a benign view of displacement, suggesting that, a ‘better’ neighbourhood becomes a form of on balance, most residents considered the neg- ‘systemic violence’ – not always a physical vio- ative aspects of displacement to be outweighed lence directly executed by individuals, but one by the benefits of living in a new home. This is that ‘operates anonymously, systemically and typically the line taken in governmental assess- invisibly through the very way society is orga- ments, with Vigdor (2002) citing a report from nised’ (Baeten et al., 2017: 643). San Francisco suggesting that displacees had Much here of course depends on where dis- not experienced severe negative changes in placed residents relocate to, with Crawford and housing characteristics. A longitudinal study Sainsbury (2017) arguing that rehousing dis- of disadvantaged groups moved as part of the placed residents across a range of locations may HOPE VI Program in San Francisco also found contribute to a loss of social networks and asso- that improvements to housing improved resi- ciated social capital (see also Posthumus et al., dents’ mental health, though many residents felt 2013). Given the choice, Lyons (1996) reports that their physical health had deteriorated over that lower-status households tend to move more time, possibly due to their unwillingness to locally than more affluent ones, reflecting both engage with local health services (Seto et al., their restricted choices as well as their desire to 2009). maintain localised social networks. Atkinson This suggests that the impacts of displace- (2003) suggests that this represents a somewhat ment are unevenly felt, with LeGates and Hart- ‘desperate’ attempt by residents to maintain a man (1986: 97) concluding that ‘displacement foothold near the locations they have come imposes substantial hardships on some classes from. But where displacees relocate to ulti- of displacees, particularly lower-income house- mately has significant consequences in terms holds and the elderly’. Those with vulnerable of their ability to construct meaningful social bodies are particularly vulnerable to displace- ties, with several US studies concluding that ment, with Philo (2005) arguing that it is vital there is little successful integration of displaced that we conceptualise the ‘geographies of households into more distanced communities wounding’ that result from such structural pro- (Goetz, 2003; Kleit and Manzo, 2006; Newman cesses rather than considering them as individ- and Wyly, 2006; Greenbaum et al., 2008). This ual happenstance. Indeed, many commentators is of course a generalisation, and it has been suggest that processes of displacement can trig- noted that younger residents find it easier to ger a range of affective responses which, in adapt than older ones: those who have lived some cases, are associated with psychological longest in their original community appear to distress, and even post-traumatic stress (Fried, gain fewest benefits from relocation (Van Crie- 1966; Fullilove, 2004; Vandermark, 2007; kengen, 2008). Indeed, older residents are usu- Manzo et al., 2008; Fussell and Lowe, 2014; ally reluctant to engage with medical services in Crawford and Sainsbury, 2017; Pain, 2019). their new neighbourhood, and sometimes travel Urban renewal programmes in US cities during long distances to engage with the GPs and phar- the 1960s saw displacement affect African- macists they are familiar with (Crawford and American communities most acutely (Hyra, Sainsbury, 2017). Kleinhans (2003) suggests 2008, compares this with the ‘new’ urban that, in addition to age, ‘personality’ can be renewal). The financial costs of displacement important in shaping experiences of displace- could be seen on individual families, whereas ment, with more resilient individuals able to the costs incurred by black businesses and take a more positive view of the ‘relocation’ socio-political infrastructure in informally Elliott-Cooper et al. 9 segregated American cities signified more conclusion that resonates strongly with Fussell structural effects. Furthermore, the ‘root and Lowe’s 2014 analysis of the impact of hous- shock’ – the psychological trauma of the eco- ing displacements post-Hurricane Katrina). nomic, social and emotional coercion of However, gentrification studies need to prop- gentrification-led displacement – further erly include displacees as people with agency stagnated the socio-political power of many and not simply present them as victims (see African-American neighbourhoods (Fullilove, Paton, 2014). As the term gentrification gained 2004). popular currency among academics in North SimilarresearchinLondonhassuggested America in the 1960s and 70s, activist- that vulnerable people already living with men- scholars detailed the community campaigns tal health issues are more likely to be displaced, challenging displacement in cities like with isolation from friends, family and local New York and San Francisco (Jacobs, 1961; services increasing their risks of more serious Hartman, 1976; Hartman et al., 1982). As these depression or psychosis (Atkinson, 2000). have evolved, resistance to gentrification-led While moving house is always a stressful expe- displacement has arguably become more rience, the stress and anxiety of enforced mobi- sophisticated, with Maeckelbergh (2012: 670) lity is often exacerbated by the tactics deployed observing that social movements are attempting by those seeking to evict residents. For example, to ‘stay put’ by ‘mobilizing the notion of Lees (2014a) discusses what she terms ‘state housing in order to transform it from something Rachmanism’ in the eviction of the last resi- tenuous and temporary’ to something more per- dents refusing to move from the manent . Examples of this can be seen on both in London, with the council turning off their gas sides of the Atlantic, through independent and electricity, and mail no longer delivered, mobilisations, as well as partnerships with pri- before bailiffs literally carried residents out. vate, voluntary sector organisations and public Arrigoitia (2014) similarly speaks of the fear bodies (DeVerteuil, 2012). This right to ‘stay experienced by tenants threatened with the put’ – obviously related to Lefebvre’s right to demolition of a public sector housing block in the city idea – is not simply a cry and demand to Puerto Rico. Here, local government used remain in an area, but asserts a resident’s agency police officers to harass residents, leading many to move or remain (Maeckelbergh, 2012). As residents, particularly women, to express feel- Baeten and Listerborn (2015) argue, the ‘right ings of depression and anxiety, and to suffer to dwell’ must be understood as a right to inha- from increased blood pressure. These impacts bit the abstract space of a ‘home’ in a wider of enforced displacement are then often gen- sense than simply remaining in one’s own resi- dered in significant ways, with Watt (2018) dence. Indeed, Baxter and Brickell (2014: 135) documenting the impacts of eviction on state, ‘unmaking can also work symbiotically working-class women living on a housing estate with the recovery or remaking of home’, high- in east London. Talking of displacement anxi- lighting the way in which a dwelling can be ety, and the pain of moving, Watt (2018) traces renewed and reproduced over time and across the movement of displaced women through space. temporary accommodation – which was conti- In the face of gentrification, residents hence nually broken into – where they were forced to mobilise a range of tactics to defend their ‘right live with housemates with problematic drug to dwell’, including public interventions and use, and put up with sanitary problems includ- pooling resources among families (Newman ing damp and bedbugs. These forms of gendered and Wyly, 2006), as well as legal campaigns and social violence led to mental health issues (a and popular protest (Lees and Ferreri, 2016; 10 Progress in Human Geography XX(X)

Watt and Minton, 2016; Hubbard and Lees, displacements and longer-term, indirect ones, 2018). In addition to possible material gains, a and not leap to conclusions about whether dis- sense of pride can also emerge as a result of placement is causing harm on the basis of one- collective ‘defiance against a common enemy’ time snapshots of change. Take for example the (Arrigoitia, 2014: 175), culminating in large violent displacements associated with forms of public meetings and demonstrations (see state-led gentrification, such as the removal and Robinson, 1995; Ghaffari et al., 2018; Watt, relocation of incumbent populations to make 2016). Thus the right to dwell extends beyond way for flagship urban developments (Chan, simply having a home in an area, encompassing 1986; Crump, 2002; Short, 2008; Melih Cin and the right to continue using commercial, commu- Egercioglu, 2015; Zhang, 2018). Displacement nity and public spaces and institutions, as well due to infrastructure projects such as the rede- as the dignity of defending such rights (David- velopment of land for the 2012 London Olym- son, 2009). But resistance is complex and pics is a case in point (Davis and Thornley, uneven, and necessities such as work, or caring 2010), as was the case for Vancouver’s Winter for family members and other dependants, can Olympic Games 2010 (Vanwynsberghe et al., make protest risky. In Puerto Rico, some resi- 2013), Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games dents resisting gentrification-led displacement 2014 (see Paton et al., 2012; Gray and Porter, were concerned that campaigning would make 2015), and Rio’s FIFA World Cup 2014 and their ability to find alternative housing more Olympic Games 2016 (Perelan, 2012; Zirin, difficult, particularly single mothers, for whom 2014). In each case, the enforced displacement the gendered trope of the irresponsible lone par- of working-class or precarious populations ent was projected by the press to legitimise before the Games was justified with reference demolitions (Arrigoitia, 2014). to both the national interest and the civilising Despite these inequalities, the fact that the impact of the sports events themselves, which struggle to stay put, or ‘right to dwell’, remains were assumed to be beneficial for the health and the core demand of anti-gentrification cam- economic well-being of those living in the paigns reaffirms displacement’s centrality in the neighbouring areas. But the irony is, of course, gentrification process. This implies a need to that the very population said to benefit from focus on such campaigns as evidence of exclu- such sports mega-events was ultimately dis- sionary pressure and a concomitant desire to placed. In the case of London, the Olympic bor- resist un-homing. Given that displacees are oughs have become increasingly unaffordable often objectified and stigmatised in public dis- for local populations, with the legacy of the courses around gentrification and ‘urban Games being rapidly rising land prices, and a renewal’, giving these campaigns voice in glut of speculative commercial and housing accounts of displacement is not just an impor- developments, many on ex-council estates tant corrective but essential if we are to inves- whose social housing has been replaced with tigate how people both survive and resist housing sold at ‘market rate’ (Watt, 2013; Fre- displacement. diani et al., 2013). While displacement can be a singular act, enacted and enforced by authorities, it can also IV The temporalities occur through a series of smaller aggressions of displacement which displace industries and businesses, as If we accept the premise that displacement can well as residents, over a longer time-span. Cur- be a form of violence, the implication is that we ran (2007), for example, notes that industrial need to be watchful for both direct, short-term displacement involves a piecemeal targeting of Elliott-Cooper et al. 11 industrial premises by real-estate developers, noted in Benson and Jackson’s (2013) account planners and landlords that typically unfolds of the transformation of Peckham and Dulwich relatively slowly. Campkin and Marshall in . In contrast to the ‘fast’ gentri- (2017) also note this trend of incremental fication and violence associated with major change in their study of LGBT nightlife in Lon- sporting events and large-scale development don, suggesting ‘grassroots’ club numbers in which often leads to protest, legal action and London decreased by 44 per cent between high-profile media coverage, here slow gentri- 2007 and 2016, with developers taking advan- fication appears to be associated with piecemeal tage of high London rents by gradually convert- retail change, greening of the local economy ing clubs into residential accommodation (see and a gradual increase in property prices; this also Doan and Higgins, 2011, on gentrifica- type of gentrification has been less obviously tion’s impact on LGBT populations). contested (see Ha˚nkansson, 2017). In part this Here, Kern’s (2016) description of the ‘slow is because the pace of change allows new violence’ of gentrification and neighbourhood middle-class incomers to become community transition appears particularly relevant. Draw- representatives, and sometimes position them- ing on Nixon’s (2011) Slow Violence and the selves as opposed to a gentrification process Environmentalism of the Poor, Kern uses this they are actually implicated in. Similar pro- term to describe the gradual emergence of cool cesses can be seen to be happening elsewhere: or ‘crunchy’ consumer spaces (e.g. organic for example, Bernt and Holm (2009) investi- cafes, microbreweries, coffee shops) which gated Prenzlauer Berg in Berlin, where some transform inner-city districts into hipster middle-class residents complained about the havens. As she notes, the transition from influx of ‘yuppie bars’ and rent rises in tradi- ‘authentic inner city liminality’ to gentrified tionally working-class housing blocks, despite spectacle can occur slowly: having previously displaced the working-class populations who dwelt in the area in the pre- As eventfulness and a particular notion of authen- unification era. ticity begin to redefine everydayness, disruptions Such observations on the temporalities of dis- to everyday life build up into significant displace- placement are important in terms of framing ment pressure for marginalized groups. For the displacement as a question of social and spatial most part, these displacements comprise a variety justice, especially if we are to chart its impacts of very ordinary, non-catastrophic non-events. on those affected. What appears particularly The removal of a bench from outside a cafe´ elim- important is that displacement is never a one- inates a place to sit and smoke near the shelter. off event but a series of attritional micro-events Coffee prices go up at all the local shops. Sex that unfold over time, generating different emo- workers move north of the train tracks. Retired tions and mental states for those affected: anxi- men sit alone on their porches. ‘No loitering’ ety, hope, confusion, fear, dislocation, loss, signs appear. These non-events ...ask us to bear witness not just to the structural and catastrophic anticipation, dread and so on (see Lombard, transformations wrought by gentrification but 2013). In some cases of enforced displacement, also to the everyday slow violence of cruddy, such as the demolition of the ‘million estates’ chronic urban inequality. (Kern, 2016: 453) around Stockholm, it can be years from the point of the announcement of the redevelop- The idea that the identities of ‘immigrant’ ment before tenants and leaseholders know neighbourhoods can only be rewritten slowly, what will happen to them (Baeten et al., and that it takes time for them to be integrated 2017). In the meantime, freeholders may leave, into circuits of ‘global gentrification’, is also the neighbourhood begin to desertify and 12 Progress in Human Geography XX(X) services begin to fail. In such cases, the life of Yet, as Marcuse (2010: 87) stated, ‘If the pain of residents is effectively suspended: there is no displacement is not a central component of what longer any incentive to improve the neighbour- we are dealing with in studying gentrifica- hood, nor is it clear how they should plan for the tion ...we are not just missing one factor in a future. They are effectively trapped in the pres- multi-factorial equation; we are missing the ent, and displaced before the event. The poten- central point that needs to be addressed’. tial psychological and physical consequences of In this paper we have hence considered living in this state of abeyance are multiple, with gentrification-induced displacement as a form the tortuous and exhausting processes of estab- of un-homing distinct from – but also related lishing how displacement will impact on one’s to – other instances of involuntary mobility, home-space leading to feelings of shame, stress suggesting that it is a form of violence that and anxiety (Wallace, 2015). This can ulti- removes the sense of belonging to a particular mately wear down individuals, leading to an community or home-space. While it is wrong to inertia that makes effective resistance to displa- suggest that the enforced movement of a house- cement impossible (Lacione, 2017). In this hold from one neighbourhood to another is the sense, there are important parallels to be drawn same as the dispossession experienced by indi- between the experiences of those being displaced genous populations under settler colonialism, or within cities and those of international refugees the plight of stateless refugees stripped of and migrants who make homes while in a state of national identity, we have stressed that all are ‘limbo’ (see Brun and Fa´bos, 2017). Diagnosing forms of violence which need to be scrutinised gentrification-led displacement thus requires an as such because of their capacity to inflict men- attentiveness to its temporal, social and spatial tal and physical harms. The fact that these harms unevenness, and its pernicious impacts on health, are distributed unevenly, with displacement quality of life, and well-being. having particularly pronounced impacts for vul- nerable working-class groups, women, minority ethnic groups, and those with complex needs, V Conclusion reminds us that displacement is an invidious Though many theories of gentrification revolve form of socio-spatial injustice. Hence, while around questions of land value and rent, here we ‘the “right to displace” is an overwhelming fact have put displacement front and central as its of life’ (Hartman, 1984: 533), we suggest that defining feature. The implication here is that we the ‘right to stay put’ should be fundamental to need a clearer understanding of what urban any imagining (or operationalisation) of the displacement is, and how it can be best right to the city (Hubbard and Lees, 2018). Such conceptualised. In this regard, Marcuse’s notions are inevitably problematic given the (1986) now-classic conceptualisation of imagining of a homed community can be some- gentrification-induced displacement remains times appear exclusive rather than radically useful, but it is also a product of its context and inclusive (Imbroscio, 2004), but given the per- time: New York City’s housing market in the vasive influence of gentrification in contempo- 1980s. It is surprising that there have been so rary cities, it appears an important basis for few attempts to provide an updated conceptua- securing other rights to the city (e.g. rights to lisation that attends to the variegated nature of access and secure urban resources and services). contemporary gentrification-induced displace- Of course, our conclusion that displacement ments globally. Indeed, conceptualisations and is an inevitable consequence of neighbour- typologies of urban gentrification massively hood gentrification, whether on a shorter- or outnumber conceptualisations of displacement. longer-term basis, could be questioned given Elliott-Cooper et al. 13 the lack of conclusive evidence that displace- supported by the ESRC grant ES/N015053/1 Gentri- ment occurs at all in some situations where fication, displacement and the impacts of council gentrification or social uplift is identified. For estate renewal in twenty first century London. this purpose – and to end once and for all the ideological schisms between those who sub- ORCID iD scribe to ‘displacement’ or ‘replacement’ mod- Phil Hubbard https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7504- els – it seems that more robust data are needed 5471 to confirm that displacement is occurring. In this paper we have argued that any investiga- References tion of gentrification-induced urban displace- Allen C and Crookes L (2009) Fables of the reconstruction: ment must consider the type of gentrification A phenomenology of ‘place shaping’ in the north of (including different types and tenures of prop- England. The Town Planning Review 80(4/5): erty), but also the scale and speed of the pro- 455–480. cess. As we have insisted, displacement is not Allinson J (2006) Over-educated, over-exuberant and just about direct replacement of poorer by over here? The impact of students on cities. Planning Practice & Research 21: 79–94. wealthy groups; it also involves forms of Arrigoitia MF (2014) Agency, ambivalence and emotions social, economic and cultural transition which in a public housing anti-demolition struggle. In: Jones alienate established populations. This can entail H and Jackson E (eds) Stories of Cosmopolitan Belong- forms of slow violence, which render particular ing: Emotion and Location. London: Routledge. neighbourhoods less hospitable and accommo- Ascensa˜o E (2015). Slum gentrification in Lisbon, Portu- dating to established residents, as well as direct gal: Displacement and the imagined futures of an infor- and forceful acts of expropriation which the mal settlement. In: Lees L, Shin H and Lopez-Morales vulnerable and precarious seem least able to E (eds) Global Gentrifications: Uneven Development cope with. This means that there cannot be a and Displacement. Bristol: Policy Press, 37–58. singular measure of gentrification-induced dis- Atkinson R (2000) The hidden costs of gentrification: Dis- placement for cities, and that simple measure- placement in . Journal of Housing and ments of displacement (e.g. census indicators the Built Environment 15: 307–326. Atkinson R (2003) Domestication by cappuccino or a suggesting a change in the social-economic or revenge on urban space? Control and empowerment tenure mix in a neighbourhood) are no longer in the management of public spaces. Urban Studies sufficient. Instead we need data that can help 40(9): 1829–1843. establish the lived experiences of urban displa- Atkinson R (2015) Losing one’s place: Narratives of cement from the perspective of established, neighbourhood change, market injustice and symbolic lower-income groups, revealing the processes displacement. Housing, Theory and Society 32: of un-homing that impact violently on some 373–388. of our most vulnerable populations. Baeten G and Listerborn C (2015) Renewing urban renewal in Landskrona, Sweden: Pursuing displace- Declaration of conflicting interests ment through housing policies. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 97: 249–261. The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of inter- Baeten G, Westin S, Pull E and Molina I (2017) Pressure est with respect to the research, authorship, and/or and violence: Housing renovation and displacement in publication of this article. Sweden. Environment and Planning A 49: 631–651. Baxter R and Brickell K (2014) For home unmaking. Funding Home Cultures 11: 133–143. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following Benson M and Jackson E (2013) Place-making and place financial support for the research, authorship, and/ maintenance: Performativity, place and belonging or publication of this article: This research was among the middle classes. Sociology 4: 793–809. 14 Progress in Human Geography XX(X)

Bernt M and Holm A (2009) Is it, or is not? The concep- displacement in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Urban Stud- tualisation of gentrification and displacement and its ies 44: 1427–1440. political implications in the case of Berlin-Prenzlauer Davidson M (2009) Displacement, space/place and dwell- Berg. City 13: 312–324. ing: Placing gentrification debate. Ethics, Place and Billingham CM (2017) Waiting for Bobos: Displacement Environment 12: 219–234 and impeded gentrification in a Midwestern city. City Davidson M and Lees L (2005) New-build ‘gentrification’ & Community 16: 145–168. and London’s riverside renaissance. Environment and Boddy M (2007) Designer neighbourhoods: New-build Planning A 37: 1165–1190. residential development in nonmetropolitan UK cities – Davidson M and Lees L (2010) New-build gentrification: the case of Bristol. Environment and Planning A 39: Its histories, trajectories, and critical geographies. 86–105. Population, Space and Place 16: 395–411. Bonds A and Inwood J (2016) Beyond white privilege: Davidson M and Wyly E (2012) Class-ifying London: Geographies of white supremacy and settler colonial- Questioning social division and space claims in the ism. Progress in Human Geography 40: 715–733. post-industrial metropolis. City 16: 395–421. Brickell K, Arrigoitia MF and Vasudevan A (2017) Geo- Davis J and Thornley A (2010) Urban regeneration for the graphies of forced eviction: Dispossession, violence, London 2012 Olympics: Issues of land acquisition and resistance. In: Brickell K, Arrigoitia MF and Vasude- legacy. City, Culture and Society 1: 89–98. van A (eds) Geographies of Forced Eviction. London: Delaney D (2004) Tracing displacements: Or evictions in Palgrave Macmillan. the nomosphere. Environment and Planning D: Society Brown-Saracino J (2004) Social preservationists and the and Space 22: 847–860. quest for authentic community. City & Community 3: Desmond M (2012) Eviction and the reproduction of urban 135–156. poverty. American Journal of Sociology 118: 88–133. Brun C and Fa´bos AH (2017) Mobilizing home for long- DeVerteuil G (2012) Resisting gentrification-induced dis- term displacement: A critical reflection on the durable placement: Advantages and disadvantages to ‘staying solutions. Journal of Human Rights Practice 2: put’ among non-profit social services in London and 177–183. Los Angeles. Area 44(2): 208–216. CampkinBandMarshallL(2017)LGBTQþ Cultural Doan PL and Higgins H (2011) The demise of queer space? Infrastructure in London: Night Venues, 2006-Present. Resurgent gentrification and the assimilation of LGBT London: UCL Urban Laboratory. neighborhoods. Journal of Planning Education and Chan KB (1986) Ethnic urban space, urban displacement Research 31(1): 6–25. and forced relocation: The case of Chinatown in Mon- Doucet B, Van Kempen R and Van Weesep J (2011) treal. Canadian Ethnic Studies 18: 65–78. ‘We’re a rich city with poor people’: Municipal Chum A (2015) The impact of gentrification on residential strategies of new-build gentrification in Rotterdam evictions. Urban Geography 36(7): 1083–1098. and Glasgow. Environment and Planning A 43: Crawford B and Sainsbury P (2017) Opportunity or loss? 1438–1454. Health impacts of estate renewal and the relocation of Engels F (1975 [1872]) The Housing Question. London: public housing residents. Urban Policy and Research Central Books. 35: 137–149. Frediani AA, Butcher S and Watt P (2013) Regeneration Crump J (2002) Deconcentration by demolition: Public and Well-Being in East London: Stories from Carpen- housing, poverty, and urban policy. Environment and ters Estate. SDP Students Report, London School of Planning D 20: 581–596. Economics. Cummings J (2015) Confronting favela chic: The gentri- Freeman L (2005) Displacement or succession? Residen- fication of informal settlements in Rio de Janeiro, tial mobility in gentrifying neighborhoods. Urban Brazil. In: Lees L, Shin H and Lopez-Morales E (eds) Affairs Review 40: 463–491. Global Gentrifications: Uneven Development and Fried M (1966) Grieving for a lost home: The psychologi- Displacement. Bristol: Policy Press, 81–100. cal costs of relocation. In: Wilson J (ed.) Urban Curran W (2007) ‘From the frying pan to the oven’: Gen- Renewal: The Record and the Controversy. Cambridge, trification and the experience of industrial MA: MIT Press. Elliott-Cooper et al. 15

Fullilove M (2004) Root Shock: How Tearing Up City Hartman C (1984) The right to stay put. In: Geisler C and Neighborhoods Hurts America, and What We Can Popper FJ (eds) Land Reform, American Style. Do About It. New York: One World/Ballantine Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Books. Hartman C, Keating D, LeGates R and Turner S (1982) Fussell E and Lowe SR (2014) The impact of housing Displacement: How to Fight It. Berkeley, CA: National displacement on the mental health of low-income Housing Law Project. parents after Hurricane Katrina. Social Science & Harvey D (2004) The ‘new imperialism’: Accumulation by Medicine 113: 137–144. dispossession. Socialist Register 40: 63–87. Ghaffari L, Klein J-L and Angulo Baudin W (2018) He S (2010) New-build gentrification in central Shanghai: Toward a socially acceptable gentrification: A review Demographic changes and socioeconomic implica- of strategies and practices against displacement. tions. Population, Space and Place 16: 345–361. Geography Compass 12: 123–155. Helbrecht I (2017) Gentrification and displacement. In: Ghertner DA (2014) India’s urban revolution: Geographies Helbrecht I (ed.) Gentrification and Resistance: of displacement beyond gentrification. Environment Research Displacement Processes and Adaption Stra- and Planning A 46: 1554–1571. tegies. Wiesbaden: Springer. Glass R (1964) Introduction: Aspects of change. In: Centre Henig JR (1980) Gentrification and displacement within for Urban Studies (eds) London: Aspects of Change. cities: A comparative analysis. Social Science Quar- London: MacKibbon and Kee. terly 61: 638–652. Glassman J (2006) Primitive accumulation, accumulation Hern M (2016) What a City Is For: Remaking the Politics by dispossession, accumulation by ‘extra-economic’ of Displacement. Boston, MA: MIT Press. means. Progress in Human Geography 30: 608–625. Hochstenbach C and Musterd S (2018) Gentrification Goetz EG (2003) Clearing the Way: Deconcentrating the and the suburbanization of poverty: Changing urban Poor in Urban America. Washington, DC: The Urban geographies through boom and bust periods. Urban Institute. Geography 39: 26–53. Graham S (ed.) (2008) Cities, War, and Terrorism: Hodkinson S (2012) The new urban enclosures. City 16: Towards an Urban Geopolitics. Chichester: John 500–518. Wiley & Sons. Hubbard P (2017) The Battle for The High Street: Retail Graif C (2016) (Un)natural disaster: Vulnerability, long- Gentrification, Class and Disgust. London: Macmillan. distance displacement, and the extended geography of Hubbard P and Lees L (2018) The right to community? neighborhood distress and attainment after Katrina. Legal geographies of resistance on London’s gentrifi- Population and Environment 37(3): 288–318. cation frontiers. City 22(1): 8–25. Gray N and Porter L (2015) By any means necessary: Huse T (2014) Everyday Life in the Gentrifying City: On Urban regeneration and the ‘state of exception’ in Glas- Displacement, Ethnic Privilege and the Right to Stay gow’s Commonwealth Games 2014. Antipode 47: Put. London: Routledge. 380–400. Hyra D (2008) The New Urban Renewal: The Economic Greenbaum S, Hathaway W, Rodriguez C, Spalding A and Transformation of Harlem and Bronzeville. Chicago: Ward B (2008) Deconcentration and social capital: University of Chicago Press. Contradictions of a poverty alleviation policy. Journal Imbroscio D (2004) Can we grant a right to place? Politics of Poverty 12: 201–228. & Society 32: 575–609. Hamnett C (2003) Gentrification and the middle-class Jackson LK (2017) The complications of colonialism for remaking of , 1961–2001. Urban Studies gentrification theory and Marxist geography. Journal 40: 2401–2426. of Law & Social Policy 27: 43–56. Ha˚nkansson I (2017) The socio-spatial politics of urban Jacobs J (1961) The Death and Life of Great American sustainability transitions: Grassroots initiatives in gen- Cities. New York: Random House. trifying Peckham. Environmental Innovation and Soci- Janoschka M and Sequera J (2016) Gentrification in etal Transitions 29: 34–46. Latin America: Addressing the politics and geogra- Hartman C (1976) Evaluation criteria for urban renewal. phies of displacement. Urban Geography 37: Journal of Architectural Education 29(4): 30–32. 1175–1194. 16 Progress in Human Geography XX(X)

Johnson JH (1983) The role of community action in neigh- Lombard M (2013) Struggling, suffering, hoping, waiting: bourhood revitalization. Urban Geography 4: 16–39. Perceptions of temporality in two informal neighbour- Jones O (2015) ‘Not promising a landfall ...’: An autoto- hoods in Mexico. Environment and Planning D: Soci- pographical account of loss of place, memory and land- ety and Space 31: 813–829. scape. Environmental Humanities 6: 1–27. Lunstrum E (2016) Green grabs, land grabs and the spati- Kearns A and Mason P (2013) Defining and measuring ality of displacement: Eviction from Mozambique’s displacement: Is relocation from restructured neigh- Limpopo National Park. Area 48: 142–152. bourhoods always unwelcome and disruptive? Housing Lyons M (1996) Gentrification, socioeconomic change, Studies 28: 177–204. and the geography of displacement. Journal of Urban Kearns A and Mason P (2015) Regeneration, relocation Affairs 18: 39–62. and health behaviours in deprived communities. Health Maeckelbergh M (2012) Mobilizing to stay put: Housing & Place 32: 43–58. struggles in New York City. International Journal of Kern L (2009) Gendering reurbanisation: Women and Urban and Regional Research 36: 655–673. new-build gentrification in Toronto. Population, Space Manzo LC, Kleit RG and Couch D (2008) ‘Moving three and Place 16: 363–379. times is like having your house on fire once’: The expe- Kern L (2016) Rhythms of gentrification: Eventfulness rience of place and impending displacement among and slow violence in a happening neighbourhood. public housing residents. Urban Studies 45: 1855–1878. Cultural Geographies 23: 441–457. Marcuse P (1986) Abandonment, gentrification, and dis- Kleinhans R (2003) Displaced but still moving upwards in placement: The linkages in New York City. In: Smith N the housing career? Implications of forced residential and Williams P (eds) Gentrification of the City. Boston: relocation in the Netherlands. Housing Studies 18: Allen and Unwin, 121–152. 473–499. Marcuse P (2010) A note from Peter Marcuse. City 14: Kleit RG and Manzo L (2006) To move or not to move: 187–188. Relationships to place and relocation choices in HOPE Massey D (1992) A place called home. New Formations VI. Housing Policy Debate 17: 271–308. 17: 3–15. Lancione M. (2017). Micropolitical entanglements: Posi- McKinnish T, Walsh R and White KT (2009) Who gentri- tioning and matter. Environment and Planning D: Soci- fies low-income neighbourhoods? Journal of Urban ety and Space 35(4): 574–578. Economics 67: 180–193. Lees L (2014) The urban injustices of New Labour’s ‘new Melih Cin M and Egercioglu Y (2015) A critical analysis urban renewal’: The case of the Aylesbury Estate in of urban regeneration projects in Turkey: Displacement London. Antipode 46: 921–947. of Romani settlement case. Social and Behavioural Lees L and Ferreri M (2016) Resisting gentrification on its Sciences 216: 269–278. final frontiers: Learning from the Heygate Estate in Newman K and Wyly EK (2006) The right to stay put, London (1974–2013). Cities 57: 14–24. revisited: Gentrification and resistance to displacement Lees L, Annunziata S and Rivas-Alonso C (2018) Resist- in New York City. Urban Studies 3: 23–57. ing planetary gentrification: The value of survivability Nixon R (2011) Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of in the fight to stay put. Annals of the Association of the Poor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. American Geographers 108: 346–355. Nowicki M (2014) Rethinking domicide: Towards an Lees L, Shin H and Lopez-Morales E (eds) (2015) Global expanded critical geography of home. Geography Gentrifications: Uneven Development and Displace- Compass 8: 785–795. ment. Bristol: Policy Press. Oslender U (2016) The banality of displacement: Dis- Lees L, Shin H and Lopez-Morales E (2016) Planetary course and thoughtlessness in the internal refugee crisis Gentrification, Cambridge: Polity Press. in Colombia. Political Geography 50: 10–19. LeGates R and Hartman C (1986) The anatomy of displa- Owens A (2012) Neighborhoods on the rise: A typology of cement in the US. In: Smith N and Williams P (eds) neighborhoods experiencing socioeconomic ascent. Gentrification of the City. London: Unwin Hyman. City & Community 11: 345–369. Ley D (2003) Artists, aestheticisation and the field of gen- Pain R (2019) Chronic urban trauma: The slow violence of trification. Urban Studies 40: 2527–2544. housing dispossession. Urban Studies 56(2): 385–400. Elliott-Cooper et al. 17

Paton K (2014) Gentrification: A Working Class Perspec- Shin H and Lopez-Morales E (2018) Beyond Anglo- tive. Aldershot: Ashgate. American gentrification theory. In: Lees L and Phillips Paton K, Mooney G and McKee K (2012) Class, citizen- M (eds) Handbook of Gentrification Studies. Chelten- ship and regeneration: Glasgow and the Common- ham: Edward Elgar, 13–25. wealth Games 2014. Antipode 44: 1470–1489. Short JR (2008) Globalization, cities and the Summer Perelan M (2012) Barbaric Sport: A Global Plague. Olympics. City 12: 321–340. London: Verso. Slater T (2006) The eviction of critical perspectives from Philo C (2005) The geographies that wound. Population, gentrification research. International Journal of Urban Space, Place 11: 441–454. and Regional Research 30: 737–757. Porteous D (1988) Topocide: The annihilation of place. In: Slater T (2009) Missing Marcuse: On gentrification and Eyles J and Smith DM (eds) Qualitative Methods in displacement. City 13: 292–311. Human Geography. Cambridge: Polity Press. Slater T, Curran W and Lees L (2004) Gentrification Porteous D and Smith SE (2002) Domicide: The Global research: New directions and critical scholarship. Envi- Destruction of Home. Toronto: McGill Queen’s Uni- ronment and Planning A 36: 1141–1150. versity Press. Smart A and Smart J (2017) Ain’t talkin’ ‘bout gentrifica- Posthumus H, Bolt G and Van Kempen R (2013) Why do tion: The erasure of alternative idioms of displacement displaced residents move to socioeconomically disad- resulting from Anglo-American academic hegemony. vantaged neighbourhoods? Housing Studies 28: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 272–293. 41: 518–525. Pratt A (2009) Urban regeneration: From the arts ‘feel Smith D (2004) Studentification: The gentrification fac- good’ factor to the cultural economy: A case study of tory? In: Atkinson R and Bridge G (eds) Urban Hoxton, London. Urban Studies 46: 1041–1061. Colonialism: Gentrification in a Global Context. Rerat P, Soderstrom O, Piguet E and Besson R (2010) London: Routledge. From urban wastelands to new-build gentrification: Smith N (2002) New globalism, new urbanism: Gentri- The case of Swiss cities. Space and Place 16: 429–442. fication as global urban strategy. Antipode 34: Robinson T (1995) Gentrification and grassroots resis- 427–450. tance in San Francisco’s Tenderloin. Urban Affairs Sullivan DM (2007) Reassessing gentrification: Measur- Review 30(4): 483–513. ing residents’ opinions using survey data. Urban Rose D (1996) Economic restructuring and the diversifica- Affairs Review 42(4): 583–592. tion of gentrification in the 1980s: A view from a mar- Till KE (2012) Wounded cities: Memory-work and a ginal metropolis. In: Caulfield J and Peake L (eds) City place-based ethics of care. Political Geography 31: Lives and City Forms: Critical Research and Canadian 3–14. Urbanism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Van Criekingen M (2008) Towards a geography of displa- Rose D (2010) Local state policy and ‘new-build gentrifi- cement: Moving out of Brussels’ gentrifying neigh- cation’ in Montreal: The role of the ‘population factor’ bourhoods. Journal of Housing and the Built in a fragmented governance context. Population, Space Environment 23(3): 199–213. and Place 16: 413–428. Van Criekingen M and Decroly J (2003) Revisiting the Seto E, Chao C, Dill L, Gilhuly K, Kontigis C, Breslar J diversity of gentrification: Neighbourhood renewal and Negev M (2009) HOPE VI to HOPE SF, San Fran- processes in Brussels and Montreal. Urban Studies cisco Public Housing Redevelopment: A Health Impact 40: 2451–2468. Assessment. Berkeley: University of California Press. Vandermark LM (2007) Promoting the sense of self, place, Shaw K (2008) Gentrification: What it is, why it is, and what and belonging in displaced persons: The example of can be done about it? Geography Compass 2: 1697–1728. homelessness. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing 21(5): Shaw K and Hagemans I (2015) ‘Gentrification without 241–248. displacement’ and the consequent loss of place: The Van Weesep J (1994) Gentrification as a research frontier. effects of class transition on low-income residents of Progress in Human Geography 18: 74–83. secure housing in gentrifying a. International Journal Vanwynsberghe R, Surborg B and Wyly E (2013) When of Urban and Regional Research 39: 323–341. the games come to town: Neoliberalism, mega-events 18 Progress in Human Geography XX(X)

and social inclusion in the Vancouver 2010 Winter Gentrification Studies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, Olympic Games. International Journal of Urban and 134–152. Regional Research 37: 2074–2093. Zirin D (2014) Brazil’s Dance with the Devil: The World Vigdor J (2002) Does gentrification harm the poor? Cup, The Olympics and the Fight for Democracy. Brookings-Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs 134–173. Chicago: Haymarket Books. Visser G and Kotze N (2008) The state and new-build Zuk M, Bierbaum AH, Chapple K, Gorska K and Loukai- gentrification in central Cape Town, South Africa. tou-Sideris A (2018) Gentrification, displacement, and Urban Studies 45: 2565–2593. the role of public investment. Journal of Planning Wallace A (2015) Gentrification interrupted in Salford, Literature 33: 31–44. UK: From new deal to ‘limbo-land’ in a contemporary Zukin S, Trujillo V, Fraser P, Jackson D, Recuber T and urban periphery. Antipode 47: 517–538. Walker A (2009) New retail capital and neighborhood Watt P (2005) Housing histories and fragmented middle- change: Boutiques and gentrification in New York class careers: The case of marginal professionals in City. City & Community 8: 47–64. London council housing. Housing Studies 20: 359–381. Watt P (2013) ‘It’s not for us’ regeneration, the 2012 Olympics and the gentrification of East London. City 17: 99–118. Author biographies Watt P (2016) A nomadic war machine in the metropolis: Adam Elliott-Cooper is a Research Associate in the En/countering London’s 21st-century housing crisis Department of Geography, King’s College London. with Focus E15. City 20: 297–320. His research interests include urban studies, postco- Watt P (2018) ‘This pain of moving, moving, moving’: lonialism and state power. Evictions, displacement and logics of expulsion in London. L’Anne´e sociologique 68: 67–100. Phil Hubbard is Professor of Urban Studies, King’s Watt P and Minton A (2016) London’s housing crisis and Collage London. He has written extensively on ques- its activisms. City 20(2): 204–221. tions of marginalisation and displacement in cities, Wolfe P (2016) Traces of History: Elementary Structures with recent books including ’The Battle for the High of Race. London: Verso. Street: retail gentrification, class and disgust’ (Pal- Young M and Willmott P (1957) Family and Kinship in grave 2017). East London. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Zhang Y (2018) Domicide, social suffering and symbolic Loretta Lees is Professor of Human Geography at violence in contemporary Shanghai, China. Urban the University of Leicester. She is internationally Geography 39: 190–213. known for her research on gentrification/urban Zhang Z and He S (2018) Gentrification induced displace- regeneration, global urbanism, urban policy, urban ment. In: Lees L and Phillips M (eds) Handbook of public space, architecture and urban social theory.