Hamnett, (1991) Blind Men and The Elephant

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

Source: Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 16, No. 2 (1991), pp. 173-
189
Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/622612
Accessed: 12-04-2018 15:56 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/622612?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is

collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the
Institute of British Geographers
This content downloaded from 194.224.214.178 on Thu, 12 Apr 2018 15:56:57 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
173
The blind men and the elephant: the explanation

of gentrification
CHRIS HAMNETT
Senior Lecturer in Geography, Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open University, Walton Hall,
Milton Keynes MK7 6AA
Revised MS received 2 January, 1991
ABSTRACT
This paper critically reviews the major theories of gentrification which have emerged over the last 10 year
which has surrounded them. It argues that the reason why the gentrification debate has attracted so much
been so hard fought, is that it is one of key theoretical battlegrounds of contemporary human geography
the arguments between structure and agency, production and consumption, capital and culture, and sup
also argues that each of the two major explanations which have been advanced to account for gentrific
and the production of gentrifiers) are partial explanations, each of which is necessary but not sufficient. Fin
an integrated explanation for gentrification must involve both explanation of the production of devalued a
and the production of gentrifiers and their specific consumption and reproduction patterns.
KEY WORDS: Gentrification, Theory, Production, Consumption, Housing, Residential change
INTRODUCTION novel and potentially interesting city-spec

research topics. Hence the large number of one-o
The gentrification phenomenon, and the locally
debate based
over case-studies.
its significance, processes, explanation and effectsand more convincing explanation is t
A second,
have occupied a remarkably large amountgentrification
of space in has posed a major challenge to
the scholarly journals over the last 10traditional
years (seetheories of residential location and urba
Hamnett, 1984; Smith and Williams, 1986social
for recent
structure (Hamnett, 1984). Neighbourh
bibliographies). In the Annals alone, there have was
change beenviewed by Hoyt and Burgess as a one-
articles by Ley (1980; 1986; 1987), Schafferprocess
and Smith
where 'the wealthy seldom reverse t
(1986), Smith (1987b) and Badcock (1989). steps and move backwards into the obsolete hou
Gentrification has now been identifiedwhich in a large
they are giving up' (Hoyt, 1939, p. 118
number of cities in North America, Europe and
Gentrification undermines the dominant assump
Australia, but despite its expansion during thatthe 1970s
filtering is a uni-directional downwards pro
and 1980s, it is still a relatively small scale
in and
whichverylower income groups move into progre
geographically-concentrated phenomenon ively deteriorated housing, and it challenges
compared
to post-war suburbanization and inner city decline.
explicit assumption underlying Alonso's 'structu
Berry (1985) dismissively refers to it as Islands
theory of of
the urban land market that the prefere
renewal in seas of decay. It is therefore important to low densities are far more import
for space and
ask why so much attention has been devoted to the
than accessibility to the central city. Finally, gen
subject. At least five possible explanations can undermines
fication be existing 'stage theories' or
identified. These are outlined in ascending order of
lutionary models of urban residential change wh
importance. First, and somewhat instrumentally,
see middle it class suburbanization as the final st
can be suggested that gentrification has of
provided a
a progression from the pre-industrial to
convenient subject for a new generation of urban
industrial city. Ley (1981) has commented that a
result of: for
geographers and sociologists on the lookout
Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S. 16: 173-189 (1991) ISSN: 0020-2754 Printed in Great Britain
174 CHRIS HAMNETT
the revitalization The

process of the
fifth, andpast
ar
the post-industrial inner city
planation have
for begu
the p
from the homes of labouring classe
temporary urban
privilege reminiscent of the inner-mos
represents one of
Sjoberg's model of the pre-industrial cit
battlegrounds in
continue, the social geography of the n
human
industrial city may geography
even appear to ur
humanists
future as a temporary who to
interlude strea
consumption
persistent pattern and sc
of higher-status
to the downtown tural Marxists
core (Ley, 1981, wh
p.
production and su
The third
reason for
main the emerge
arenas of co
cation as a central research
culture, issue lie
preferenc
political debatesponents
regarding gentrif
of the imp
placement. Whereas gentrification
Indeed, two of the
Neil
some as the saviour ofSmith have
the inner b
cit
to decades of white middle
bates about class fli
epistem
abandonment and offering
geography as aanwhi
Smith, 1982;
(Sumka, 1979; Sternlieb and 1987
Hug
regard To the
it as a threat extent
to inner tha
city w
(Ley, 1981; Hartman, 1979; Marc
gentrification is
and Hartman, 1986) and a econom
physically, prelud
alsoof
conversion of parts theoretically
the inner ci
playground (Schaeffer
comprisesandaSmith,
contes
cally different
A fourth, and related explanation, th
cation can be seen to constitute
arguably this asp
'leading edges' others,
of contemporary
which has k
structuring. Just as suburbanizat
forefront of urban
decline comprised decade. The gentr
the leading edges
turing in the 1950s and 1960s, an
high theoretical s
ingly,
argued to represent oneitofhas
thealso
lead
restructuring in the 1970s of
proponents andprod19
reversing innerthe city advocates
middle classof c
housing decay,versa.
gentrification
As Schaeffer re
reversal of previous trends. From
gentrification, like suburbanizatio
the debate over cause
lights the importance of capital
production based v s
different sectors of
.... the
Eacheconomy and
of the dif
the city (Smith,involves
1979; Harvey, 19
a larger the
1989; King, 1989a,
way1989b,
in which 1989c).
urban
developed by Smith and
repatterned Willi
(Schaeff
suggest, among other things, that
to be seen as part of the
And Rose changing
(1984) noi
division of labour, and the
Marxist emerge
analyses of
with control and command functio
urban heirarchy dominated by flo
Marxist work on g
tal. This is leading to a restructurin
'correct' place to be
heirarchy and of
withintra-urban
the production sp
Smith (1986) thus reject the
dwellings. I useclaim
the
such as Berry who
the see
factgentrificat
that this ty
process. They argue that:
starting point'wein are
th
curious anomaly but a trenchant
grounded . . . activi
urban space' the primary
(Schaeffer motor
and Smith,
The blind men and the elephant 175
.... To a large extent, Marxist approaches to
argue that the rolegentrifi-
of the state is important for an
cation have defined their objectives self-consciously
understanding in
of gentrification in certain areas, there
opposition to positivist approaches.is..considerable
A crucial debateelement
over the relative importance to
in the Marxist approach, in contrast, to positivist
be given to individual actors and their motivations
approaches, is that it sees that gentrification is ... not
and to the structural
reductible to the behaviour of individuals (Rose, role of the state. In some respects
1984,
therefore, the debate over the role of the state in
pp. 49-50).
gentrification reflects and embodies the wider gentri-
fication debate between the proponents of structure
It is this aspect of gentrification, that of intellectual and agency (Gregory, 1981).
battleground between competing and radically The paper is divided into nine sections. The first
opposed theoretical perspectives, that I intend to section defines gentrification and outlines the criteria
focus on in this article. Although several alternative for explanation. The second and third sections out-
explanatory emphases have been identified (Hamnett, line and assess Ley's approach. The fourth and fifth
1984; Ley, 1986; Smith, 1986), notably those of sections outline and assess Smith's initial 'rent gap'
changes in demography, life-style and urban amenity; thesis. The sixth section stresses the importance of
land and housing market dynamics and in urban econ- the 'production of gentrifiers' and their locational
omic activity and employment structures, in essence preferences, the seventh section examines Smith's
they collapse into two main competing sets of reformulations and his attempt to incorporate con-
explanations. The first, primarily associated with the sumption into his theoretical framework, and the
work of Smith has stressed the production of urban eighth outlines the elements of an integrated theory.
space, the operation of the housing and land market, The final section summarizes and concludes the
the role of capital and collective social actors such as argument.
developers and mortgage finance institutions on the
supply of gentrifiable property. The second, which
Smith has termed the consumption side argument, GENTRIFICATION: A DEFINITION AND
focuses on the production of gentrifiers and their CRITERIA FOR EXPLANATION
associated cultural, consumption and reproductive

As a preliminary to the outline and analysis of t
orientations (Ley, 1980; 1981; Mullins, 1982; Moore,
competing arguments, we first need to define gentr
1982; Rose, 1984; Williams, 1984; Beauregard, 1986).
cation, and establish the criteria for a comprehen
This paper argues that both of the two principal
explanation, against which various theories can
theoretical perspectives on gentrification are partial
assessed and evaluated. Hamnett (1984, p. 2
abstractions from the totality of the phenomenon,
defined gentrification as:
and have focused on different aspects to the neglect
of other, equally crucial elements. Like Aesop's fable Simultaneously a physical, economic, social and cultu
of the blind men and the elephant, each of the major phenomenon. Gentrification commonly involves t
theories has perceived only part of the elephant of invasion by middle-class or higher-income groups
gentrification. The two theoretical perspectives are previously working-class neighbourhoods or mu
complementary rather than competing. This has sub- occupied 'twilight areas' and the replacement or displa
ment of many of the original occupants. It involves t
sequently been slowly appreciated, and the initial
physical renovation or rehabilitation of what was fr
exclusionary tendencies have been watered down to
quently a highly deteriorated housing stock and i
some extent. The gradual emergence of an integrated
upgrading to meet the requirements of its new owne
theory of gentrification (Hamnett, 1984; Beauregard, In the process, housing in the areas affected, both re
1986) has arisen from the realization that production vated and unrenovated, undergoes a significant pr
and consumption are both crucial to a comprehensive appreciation. Such a process of neighbourhood transit
explanation. commonly involves a degree of tenure transformati
In arguing this thesis, only limited attention is paid from renting to owning.
to the debates over the role of the state in gentrifi-
Smith (1987b, p. 463) stated:
cation and to the gender dimensions of the process
(Rose, 1984; 1989) but it is contended that, while
The crucial point about gentrification is that it invol
important, these are essentially secondary to the not only a social change but also, at the neighbourho
central issue of production versus consumption. scale, a physical change in the housing stock and
Although Cybriwsky et al. (1986) and Smith (1989) economic change in the land and housing market. It
176 CHRIS HAMNETT
this combination of
the new social,
liberalism physical
was to be recognised less by its p
change that distinguishes
duction schedulesgentrification
than by its consumption styles (La
process/set of processes.
1980, p. 239).
It is clear from these

Ley also argueddefinitions tha
that: 'an understanding of the eme
involves a ing
change both
urban landscape inrequiresthe socia
a prior grasp of wi
an area and its residents,
ranging processes of and
change ina society
change itself' (L
the housing stock (tenure,
1980, price,
p. 240). In an attempt to identifycond
these,
adequate explanation of gentrificat
drew on the work of Daniel Bell on post-indust
cover both aspects of
society and the
Habermasprocess; the
on advanced capitalism.
residents. Moving from
accepted they were these definit
unlikely theoretical bedfellow
fication of the criteria
but argued there was:for explanat
'a deeper complementarity
cation, I suggesttheir
that any comprehen
positions. Both see a decisive transition betwe
of gentrificationnineteenth
must andexplain four
late twentieth century k
societ
process. First, why
betweengentrification is p
the industrial period (early capitalism) a
centrated in a small number
post-industrialism (late capitalism) of lar
.... (p.240).
Paris, London, NewLey's thesisYork, San
involved three key Fran
propositions focu
Sydney and Melbourne
ing respectively(and why
on economics, politics it is
and cultu
older industrial As
cities). Secondly, wh
we shall see later, the order is important. First,
occurs in some areas
the level ofand housing
the economy, the decliningand role
the characteristics of
unskilled labourthe areasprocess
in the production invo and
must explain which groups
growing importance become
of technology in the factory
why, and fourthly,
the office andit must
in administration is aexplai
major break w
gentrification. the
In other
nineteenth words,
century. This has been associateda
wi
explanation musta majoraddress
transformation of thethe ques
labour force, wit
which who, areas,
declinewhen
in blue collar and why.
workers and a growth of wh
I shall the argue in
collar workers, particularly in theof
remainder this
professional, ma
of the major explanations
agerial, administrative and addresses
technical occupations.
of these questions, but
linked this not
to the shift from others.
a goods producing I t
argued that while each is of
service-producing society, and consider
to the decline
value, they are incapable
manufacturing industry in isolation
and the rise of office work
these questions by virtue
The second propositionof their
was that f
post-industr
Therefore theysociety
constitute partial
is distinguished from industrial society by
limited validity. active
As Smith (1979)
role of government. As a consequence isof in
th
to previous work by
Ley argued thatLey (1978)
'decision making an
and allocation
work will be considered first.
resources is now referred to the political arena a
not only to the market place .... The politicization
CULTURE AND CONSUMPTION IN THE varied interest groups is challenging the forme
POST-INDUSTRIAL CITY firm hold of the business lobby on political decis
making' (Ley, 1980, p. 241). Thirdly, Ley argued t
In 1980 David Ley published 'Liberal ideologyat theand the
sociocultural level there has been a re-asserti
post-industrial city'. In this paper he set out
of what can of individuality and a growth of a m
the role
be seen in retrospect to be a key theoretical statement
sensuous and aesthetic philosophy among the gro
regarding the origins and causes of gentrification
ing numbers of the North American service cla
although its focus was on the rise of the Electors Action
particularly on the West coast. He concluded that
Movement in Vancouver and their policy of limiting
real estate and freeway development and creating a from this framework the appearance o
we may see
theoretically
livable city. In what later proved to be a red rag to significant group of actors ... (who) form
Marxist analysts, Ley argued that: theoretical counterpoint to nineteenth century notio
of capital and labor ... a class in emergence .... Wit
A new ideology of urban development was in the
secure economic base, they represent the present d
making. Urban strategy seemed to be passingcounterparts
from an of Veblen's leisure class, displaying t
canons
emphasis on growth to a concern with the quality of good taste, intent upon the aesthetic. Th
of life;
lifestyle is ... consumption and status orientated
local housing in
market, quickening the tr
pursuit of self-actualization '(Ley, 1980, pp. 242-3).
cess and fuelling inflationary land val
speculation and by increasing the exp
Ley's reference to 'a class in emergence' is import-
homeowners to receive windfall pric
ant, and he noted that as the post-industrial thesis
homes' (Ley, was p. 138, emphases add
1981,
developed by sociologists it was The
not causal
locationally
primacy is quite clear. Ley se
specific. But he argued that 'these traits
activity as are not
stimulated by the market p
uniformly distributed; there is agrowing
geography of collar
white the labour force, which
post-industrial society ... it might
of fit circumstances
changes in economic and employmen
more closely in San Francisco or He London than in
has reiterated this view in a more
Cleveland or Glasgow' (Ley, 1980,paper.
pp. 242-3).
As he This is
put it:
a key point which has an important bearing on the
question of where gentrification job is found
growthand Leywhite-collar complex o
(in) the
proceeded to apply the thesis to Vancouver, looking
head offices, producer services, and indirectl
at changes in industrial, occupational and demo-
institutions and agencies in... nodal centr
graphic structures and in the lifestyles and inner city
the 'production' of professionals, manage
housing market which had occurred. Ley did
quaternary not
employees working downtow
provide
explicitly refer to the term gentrification the demand
in this paper, base for housing re-in
the inner
but in 1981 he made a clear link between thecity ... this population, as it give
growth
economic expression
of the tertiary and quaternary sectors, the growth of to its own predelict
amenity, will restructure the built envir
professional and managerial occupations, changes in
accelerate the gentrification process (Ley, 1
the structure of housing demand in Vancouver and
gentrification. As he put it:
AN ASSESSMENT OF LEY'S THEORY OF
it is possible to follow the transmission of large scale
POST-INDUSTRIAL URBANISM
adjustments in the economy to the pattern of job creation
in Vancouver, with trends favouring white collar job
There is much in Ley's thesis that Marxist analys
growth in the central business district. These contextual
would strongly
factors lie behind the demographic changes challenge,
in the metro- not least the politic
emphasis
politan area and the housing demand he accords
pressures whichto a new elite of tastemake
and
accompanied them (Ley, 1981, p. 128 opinion formers,
emphases added). the importance of culture a
consumption, his acceptance of the idea of po
industrialism
But these housing demand pressures (Walker and Greenberg, 1982), and
are locationally
specific. Discussing the growingseeming
number relegation of the production of the bu
of small,
environment
young, high income households and and nineteenth-century
their impact on notions
the inner city housing market, Leylabour andthat
argued capital to a secondary role in urban affa
cultural
factors are important: 'The neighbourhoods
But Ley was not them-
advocating an autonomous theory
consumption-determined
selves include a measure of life-style, ethnic and archi- urban development a
tectural diversity, valued attributes of or
change, middle-class
a straightforward consumer prefere
movers to the central city ... these desiderata
theory of the as some of his critics ha
of gentrification
culture of consumption should notargued, and nor does his work rest just on Bell's c
be under-estimated
in interpreting the revitalizationcept
of of
the
theinner city'
post-industrial city. On the contrary, t
(Ley, 1981, p. 128). importance he accords to culture and consumption
the post-industrial
Ley had less to say on the structure and operation city are clearly rooted in t
of urban land and housing market deeper
and thechanges
supplyin the
andstructure of production, t
changing
production of gentrifiable properties and division
areas and,of labour, and the rise o
where he does, it is more focused on theconcentrated
locationally demand service class.
aspects of the equation. Ley noted the role
While Leyof the that
argues real this class played a key role
estate industry, but he accorded it a and
politics secondary
culture, heor
also identified it as a product
reinforcing role in the gentrificationthe changes Referring
process. in the division of labour and the spatia
uneven
to the revitalization of the inner city areanature of these changes. He thus link
of Kitsilano,
he states that: 'There is little doubttogether
that thechanges
activityin ofthe organization of pr
the real estate industry added to the instability
duction of the politics and culture, into
and the economy,
178 CHRIS HAMNETT
approach to gentrification and

contradictory. In his view, the actions urba
of produ
well as
the production of consumers need to be taken
gentrifiers into accoun
and th
teristics and requirements. Witho
explaining the gentrification phenomenon. As
have been guilty of
it: 'To advocating
explain gentrification accordinga no
to the g
sumption-based, theory
fier's of
actions alone, while gentrifi
ignoring the role of bu
have suggested. developers,
But, landlords,
in my mortgage
view, lenders, th
go
preted his ment agencies,
stress on real estate agents and
culture andtenan
narrow demand excessively narrow. A broader theory of gentr
and preference-bas
in tion must
fact, it is based on takechanges
the role of producers
in as we
th
division of labour and
consumers into on
account' the
(Smith, su
1979, p. 540).
gentrifiers. TheseSmith changes underp
is entirely correct in this respect, an
of a new culture and
is something that the residen
Ley largely failed to do.
demands that follow
what Smith from it.
then proceeded to do was to arg
Looking at Ley's early
producer dominance: work in g
argued that its strength lies in its f
in the social and spatial
it appears that the needs divisions
of production - in particul
concentration inneeda tolimited number
earn profit - are a more decisive initiative b
service-dominated gentrification than consumer
cities, of preference.
a prof This is
agerial elite. He say in some naive way a
accords thatconsider
consumption is the
role of changes matic
in consequence
culture of production,and
or that consumer
con
erence is a totally passive effect caused by produ
residential requirements or demand
Such would be a producer's sovereignty theory, a
but he locates this in the context
as one-sided as its neo-classical counterpart. Rathe
nature and structure of economic
relationship between production and consumption is s
thesis is strongest in
otic, but it is a the explanatio
symbiosis in which production domi
type of city in which gentrification
Although it is of secondary importance in initiati
and the characteristics of
actual process, and therefore the
in explaining why g
gen
implicitly deals with
cation the
occurred in the timing
first place, consumer prefe
through its and demand
analysis ofare ofthe
primary importance
growth in determ
omy in the the final
1970s and form and character of revitalized
1980s. Wher areas (S
its explanation 1979, p.the

of 540 emphases
areasadded). in wh
occurs, which Ley sees largely as a
Smith concluded that: and the am
for inner city locations
facilities they offer to the gentrif
The so-called urban renaissance
potential gentrifiable houses has been stimulatedis ass
from the demands and
more by economic market
than cultural forces. In the decision to p
rehabilitate inner cityother
gentrifiers to outbid structure, one consumer preference
users.
the market power tends to standofout above the others -new
the the preference for
elit
profit, or, more accurately a sound financial investment.
sees the power to outbid other user
Whether or not gentrifiers articulate this preference, it is
minant of the urban landscape: pe
fundamental, for few would even consider rehabilitation
as the new elite's culture of consum
if a financial loss were to be expected. A theory of gentri-
fication must therefore explain why some neighbour-
THE SUPPLY-SIDE ANALYSIS: hoods are profitable to redevelop while others are not?
GENTRIFICATION AND THE 'RENT-GAP' What are the conditions of profitability? Consumer
sovereignty explanations took for granted the avail-
ability of areas ripe for gentrification when this was
Ley's approach to the explanation of gentrification
precisely
stressed the production of gentrifiers and their what had to be explained (Smith, 1979,
cultural
and consumption requirements as its key pp. 540-1).
element. The
supply of gentrifiable properties and the operation of
the urban land and housing markets were accorded
Smith a to lay out his theory of the
then proceeded
secondary role. Smith (1979) completely rent gap. This this
reversed is by now very well known, and I do
explanatory emphasis, arguing that the 'consumer
not intend to detail his argument in full. Suffice to say
preference' arguments were taken forthat granted and
it locates gentrification within long-term shifts of
investment and disinvestment in the built
tal, environ-
eventually produces the rent gap. W
grows
ment, and focuses on the relationship sufficiently
between landlarge, rehabilitation (or fo
renewal) can begin to challenge the rates of
and property value, particularly on the way in which
able elsewhere and capital flows back' (S
disinvestment produces the possibility of capital re-
p. 546).
investment. Smith argues that in the nineteenth cen-
tury, most cities had a classical land value
Hence, the subtitle gradient,
of Smith's paper: 'A back to the
highest at the centre and falling gradually
city movement towards
by capital, not the
people'.
periphery. But, as the suburbanization of industry and
population proceeded from the turn of the century
AN ASSESSMENT OF SMITH'S RENT GAP
onwards, land values in the inner city fell relative to the
THEORY OF GENTRIFICATION
CBD and the suburbs and a 'valley' in the land value
gradient opened up which intensifiedThis is an during
elegant the
argument, and Smith was q
decades of sustained suburbanizationcorrectinto 1940s,
attempt 50sto shift the emphasis away f
and 60s. This devalorization of the the early
inner consumer
city provided preference and demand a
the basis for subsequent profitablements
reinvestment.
towards a consideration of the supply of
trifiable
The key for Smith, is the relationship propertyland
between and the role of mortgage fin
value and property value. When depreciation
and profitability.ofBut
theit is now clear that, despite
existing structures has proceeded far enough,
importance the
of his rent gap thesis for an understan
point is reached where the capitalized
of theground rent of
uneven pattern of investment, disinvestm
site or neighbourhood is less than its potential
and reinvestment in the built environment, his re
ground rent in its 'highest and besttion use'. This is explanatory
of alternative the approaches,- part
rent gap, and according to Smith, gentrification
larly the role of theor new class, and its consump
redevelopment, can occur when andthe gap characteristics,
cultural is wide and his unwillingne
enough to ensure a profit. accord individual actors any significant role rende
his initial approach of only limited value for
Once the rent gap is wide enough, gentrification may be
explanation of gentrification. In Smith's thesis, i
initiated in a given neighbourhood by several different
vidual gentrifiers are merely the passive handmaid
actors in the land and housing market. And here we come
of capital's requirements.
back to the relationship between production and con-
sumption, for the empirical evidenceThe logical strongly
suggests place to start is with Smith's reject
that the process is initiated not by of
theconsumer
exercisedemand theory and Ley's post-indust
of those
thesis.
individual consumer preferences much Smithof
beloved acknowledged
neo- that only Ley's p
classical economists, but by some industrial
form ofthesis
collective
is broad enough to account for
social action at the neighbourhoodtrification
level (Smith, 1979,
internationally, but he rejected it as be
p. 545 emphasis added). contradictory. If individual preferences chang
unison, they cannot be individual preferences or
Smith's opposition to any explanation of gentrifi-
overriding constraints are strong enough to f
cation based on individual consumer preferences
them into is
the same mould. There is some truth in
clear cut, and referring to the importance of mortgage
second argument. Consumer preferences do
funding in this process, he argues that:
emerge out of thin air. They are partly soci
All the consumer preference in thecreated,
world manipulated
will come to and shaped, and they are nec
arily of
nought unless this long absent source made on the basis
funding re- of the available options
appears; mortgage capital is a prerequisite.
constraints Of
andcourse,
not always in the circumstances of
this mortage capital must be borrowed by willing
individual's con-
own choosing. Where Smith is wron
sumers exercising some preference or another. But these
in arguing that, for the concept of individual p
preferences are not prerequisites since
erence tothey canindividuals
be valid, be in different count
socially created (Smith, 1979, pp. 545-6).
must make different choices. If similar groups in
ferent countries are facing similar options at the s
Smith summarizes his thesis as follows:
time, it is scarcely surprising that there may be sim
outcomes. But this does not mean that individuals
'gentrification is a structural product of the land and
housing markets. Capital flows where totally
the ratedetermined in
of return is their choices as Smith (1
highest, and the movement of capital to
p. 540) the suburbs
seems to imply, or that all 'preferences ar
socially
along with the continual depreciation created'.
of inner city capi-
180 CHRIS HAMNETT
Smith's solutioncorrect (see Moor

is to redefine pre
of 'collective social
cess is
preference',
not initiat
explain where consumer
collective preferen
social p
from. All it does is to
lective displac
social acti
(p. 545).
explaining the origins of Smith's
prefere t
a more ideologically
the roleacceptable,
of indivi
mysterious level.lective social
It should ac
also
only a minority identifies
of people three
decide tt
city and become gentrifiers.
operate Man
in gentrif
move out to the suburbs. There r
(a) professional deve
the problem of explaining why so
develop it and resel
thing, and some do another.
who buy and redev
explained in terms of capital
completion; (c)flo
lan
and reinvestment. Although
tenants the g
after rehabi
cess does involve
of... capital flows
ownership has
people, and this
isis Achilles
generally anheel
inef
side thesis. industry into an
devalued
Not only does Smith neighbour
relegate cons
and demand to a subsidary role in
What Smith is arg
duction of residential space, he arg
other assertions on
of a theory of gentrification m
interests, and the s
reasons why somethatneighbourhood
the individual
redevelop while others are not. Sm
the most importan
consumer sovereignty/demand
the production of g
took for granted the availability
classifying them as
gentrification. But, as we shall
this awkward se
intru
an almost identical trap by takin
consumption into
existence of a pool of gentrifiers an
the extent that in
demand. He assumed that if the con
a key role in the g
bility were favourable that gentrifi
certainly true in Lo
matter, renewal) would take place a
production and con
tial gentrifiers were on hand to
fails to explain whe
revalorization process. Only
fiers come later
from,
rectify this lacuna, itself a product
gentrifiers, while
assume that demand was of seco
individuals seem
to supply in the explanation of gen
gap, irrespective o
Smith is correct in arguing for t
demands, but as R
mortgage finance in urban resident
Harvey (1974), Williams (1976;
gentrifiers 19
are not
mined
Dingemans (1979), independently
Wolfe et al. (1
Randolph tain
(1986; types have
1987) of work
a
element in the produ
although absence of mortgage finan
duction of the dwel
fication impossible on all but a smal
not make the pote
does not, of itself,
contingent situation
create gentrif
finance is a necessary but not a suf
large-scale Rose's statement
gentrification. Nor is it
the economistic
to argue that although 'mortgagan
borrowed by willing
rent gap consumers
theory o
ing stress
preference or another on the
... preferen
created' (Smith It cannot
1979, p. be too
546). Thst
cation
Smith implies that does not oc
all preferences a
which is nonsensical. Nor
gentrifiers. is
Althou
for gentrification to occur, it is nottheir own housing, are
sufficient. Itessential
does to the particular histories
not necessitate that gentrification which
will unfold
takein place.
a place' (Clark,
In- 1988, p. 244).
deed, rent gap theory says nothing about
Badcock why gentri-
(1989) in his study of Adelaide, South
fication should take place rather than some
Australia other
found form
convincing evidence that a sizeable
of renewal or redevelopment. Therent rent
gap gap theory
had developed byof
1970 in the City and in
gentrification is thus substantiallysome
under-determined.
of the surrounding Victorian residential suburbs
Gentrification is not 'to be expected' where
and that the
substantial rent
gentrification had subsequently
gap exists; it is a contingent phenomenon. Gentrifica-
occurred which filled in the rent gap. But he also
tion could occur but so could renewal, deterioration
concluded that 'the processes responsible for this rent
or abandonment.
gap are nowhere near as straightforward as Smith
And given that the gap between
would potential and
have it' (Badcock, 1989, p. 132). He argued
actual ground rents is predicated
that on the existence
gentrification was the third best response of capi-
of potential ground rent, Smith says
tal to very
existing little
conditions in Adelaide, and was, in
about the processes by which such
some ways apotential
sub-optimal investment strategy
ground rents come into existence.
(p. 133).It
In is possible,
other words, gentrification was not an
for example, that in gentrifying inevitable
areas, outcome
the potential
of the rent gap.
ground rent is, in part, a result It of demand
is clear from these from
two studies that the existence
potential gentrifiers (Moore, 1982). As
of a rent gapMunt (1987) condition for gentrifi-
is not a sufficient
argues: 'As gentrifiers can afford numerous
cation to occur. inner-city
On the contrary, the existence of a
residential locations, it follows that the size of the rent
rent gap can lead to a variety of different results
gap in particular locations depends including
on their attractive-
redevelopment or further decline. More
ness, and hence on demand, which is absent from
generally, it appears that Smith's theory is of value
Marxist gentrification theory' insofar
(p. 1177). Ley the
as it explains goesexistence of areas within
further to argue that the rentcities gap is not even
where gentrification maya take place. It says
necessary element of gentrification. In
nothing hiswhy
about view, all
gentrification tends to occur in
that is necessary is the potential some
forcities
profit and
rather than the or about the character-
others,
ability of gentrifiers to outbid existing or potential
istics and origins of the gentrifiers themselves, and
users for desirable inner city sites. Ley also argues
why they gentrified rather than suburbanized. As an
that most developers are risk averse and
analysis of willofnot
the cycles investment and disinvest-
risk entering an area until demand
mentisinproven. 'From
the built environment it remains a major
the developers point of view, demand
contribution,isbutthe bot-
its role in explaining other aspects
tom line. In short capital follows demand,is though
of gentrification limited.
this is not to say that local markets cannot
The principal beSmith's theory was
reason why
manipulated e.g., blockbusting or that demand is
unable to address these other questions was that,
produced by broader economicgiven
contexts'
its focus on (1990,
the production of the built environ-
personal communication). ment, it was 'limited to the specification of pre-
These problems with the rent gap thesis
conditions for have been of gentrified dwellings
the production
documented in two recent empirical studies. the
without considering Clark
production of 'gentrifiers',
(1988) found clear evidence of a rent gap in his pioneer-
the occupants of such dwellings' (Rose, 1984, p. 51).
ing analysis of the evolution ofBecause
landSmith
andfocused
propertyhis explanation on the produc-
values in Malmo, Sweden, but he tion argued that
of the rent gap,itand
wasconflated and dismissed as
theoretically explicable either in 'preferences',
terms of Marshall's
changes in occupational structure,
neo-classical formulation or in terms of Smith's
demographic and reproductive behaviour, he ignored
Marxist one, and that the rent gap was in no sense a material changes influencing the production of
key
determinant of gentrification or a complete expla-
gentrifiers, and equated materialist explanations with
nation for it. In fact redevelopment rather than gentrifi-
the rent gap.
cation occurred in all cases in Malmo. Clark thus
rejected the idea of:
THE PRODUCTION OF GENTRIFIERS AND
some predetermined development with the 'needs ofTHEIR LOCATIONAL CHOICES
capital' as prime mover and the rent-gap as time-set
triggering mechanism. The action of agents with econ-In the early 1980s, Ley's thesis regarding the ro
omic or political interests, and of individuals interested inchanges in the social and spatial division of labour
182 CHRIS HAMNETT
in occupational structure
theoretical and empirical work by Marxists has been and t
exclusively preoccupied
middle class' and the with those links
aspects of gentrifi- to g
paralleled in cation which can be directly related to the operation of
different ways
workers who made theoretical links between the law of value in the built environment of capitalist
cities .... This has created not only an analytical gap but
changes in the social and spatial restructuring of
also an epistemological error of considerable importance
labour processes, corporate organization and what
(Rose, 1984, p. 52).
Rose (1984) termed the production of gentrifiers.
One such link was made by Mullins (1982) who She argues that it is essential to move beyond this
argued that dramatic changes had taken place inlimited conception to explore the links between
very
the Australian inner city. The decline of inner city
gentrification and changes in the social and spatial
manufacturing and the skilled working class resi-
restructuring of labour processes and the repro-
dent population had been accompanied by duction
the of labour power and people, which have been
emergence of corporate centres for monopoly
largely ignored by economistic approaches which see
capitalism and middle class office workers. Mullins
social processes as either derivable from the economic
linked this to gentrification, arguing that 'whereas
or epiphenomenal. Beauregard (1986) has similarly
the working class of an earlier form of inner argued
city that the rent gap alone is a totally inadequate
lived there because of employment reasons centred
explanation of gentrification. 'The explanation for
on manufacturing industry, "educated labour"gentrification
is begins with the presence of "gentri-
coming to reside in the inner city (for) unique con-
fiers", the necessary agents and beneficiaries of the
sumption reasons' (p. 45-6). But, as Mullins noted:
gentrification process, and the directions taken by
'the development of office employment cannot their reproduction and consumption' (Beauregard,
wholly explain the residential increase of inner city
1986, p. 41).
educated labour simply because the bulk of these His argument involved three key components.
workers ... reside in the suburbs and commute ....
First, that the demand for inexpensive, inner-city
Other processes must have been involved in this housing is not a new phenomenon and cannot simply
residential development' (Mullins, 1982, p. 53). A be explained by the rent gap. Secondly, that 'the gen-
similar link was also made by Moore (1982, p. 1) trifiers are often, though seldom alone, the "agents" of the
who argued that 'gentrification represents the pro- gentrification process, and thus provide the motivations
cess whereby an important fraction of the new class is and aspirations that shape it', and thirdly, that without
establishing a residential identity concomitant with this group the process ceases to exist. Different types
its social identity, with the overall context of the of housing might be rehabilitated, but as character-
central city becoming more and more a white collar istics of gentrifiers are broadly similar across a variety
city'. of different areas, 'gentrification is defined by the presence
Mullins pointed to the key role of production and of gentrifiers' (Beauregard, 1986, p. 41 emphases
consumption of particular leisure-orientated arts ser- added).
vices within the inner city, which are produced and This is an argument radically at odds with that put
consumed by a limited number of educated workers.
forward by Smith. The causal primacy is exactly the
This explanation for gentrification, which is linked reverse. Whereas Smith assumed the existence of
to the production of gentrifiers and to their cultural potential gentrifiers, and saw the production of
requirements is similar to Ley's thesis, and identifies a appropriate areas as the key to the process, Beauregard
specific reason for the locational concentration of the identifies gentrifiers as the key to explaining the pro-
new class in the inner cities: their cultural needs and
cess. Gentrification without gentrifiers does not exist.
the concentration of cultural facilities. The locational
Like Ley and Mullins, Beauregard points to the crucial
question is of crucial importance. What Mullins role played by the changes in industrial and occu-
realized was that the growth of a new middle class or pational structure, and suggests that it is within the
service class is necessary, but not sufficient to explain 'urban professional and managerial fraction of labor
gentrification. A sufficient explanation must also that gentrifiers are situated'. And like Rose (1984),
account for why some of this group reside in the inner Mullins (1982), Moore (1982) and Williams (1984),
city rather than elsewhere (see also Moore, 1982). Beauregard argues that:
The argument regarding the key role of the pro-
duction of potential gentrifiers was developed by In order to explain why these professionals and man-
Rose (1984) who argued that: agers ... remain within the city and also engage in
gentrification we must more away from the fact ofthe
urban transformation.
sphere of Given the movement of
capital into the urban
production and focus upon their reproduction core, con-
and and the emphasis on execu-
sumption activities .... What is it about an urban
tive, professional, resi-
administrative and managerial func-
dence, in addition to proximity to
tions,work, which
as well as other is the demographic
support activities,
and lifestyle changes
especially compatible with the reproduction and ... help to explain why we have
con-
sumption activities of this fraction of labour?
proliferating (1986,
quiche bars rather than Howard Johnstons,
p. 43). trendy clothes boutiques and gourmet food shops rather
than corner stores' (Smith, 1986, p. 31).
Beauregard concludes by arguing that:
This view represents the total marginalization of
the rent gap argument provides only one of the necessary consumption' to influencing the colour and design of
conditions for gentrification and none of the sufficient ones .... the icing on the cake of urban restructuring and gen-
Many areas of central cities have rent gaps greatly in trification. It ignores the arguments put forward by
excess of those areas that gentrify. Thus the theory can-
Moore, Beauregard and Ley regarding the import-
not easily explain why Hoboken... becomes gentrified,
ance of culture and consumption in explaining why
but Newark ... does not (1986, p. 39 emphases added).
the new class gentrify the inner city rather than move
out to the suburbs. While Smith accepts that it is
This is a crucial point which greatly weakens Smith's
important to explain the role of changes in the struc-
claims. To sum up, it is clear that the existence of a pool
ture of production and the changing spatial division
of new middle class potential gentrifiers is a necessary
of labour in producing professional and managerial
pre-requisite for gentrification to take place. So is the
workers in the inner city, he fails to address the reason
existence of a stock of potentially gentrifiable areas
and houses. But neither of these are sufficient for why a fraction of this group should locate in the inner
city. And when he discusses the role of gentrifiers he
gentrification to occur. That requires a fragment of the
resolutely dismisses any idea that they might play a
expanded professional and managerial group who
wish to live in the inner areas, and a concentration ofcrucial role in the process:
appropriate facilities and environments. Without as with the original frontier, the mythology has it that
these prerequisites, it is highly unlikely that gen- gentrification is a process led by individual pioneers and
trification will occur notwithstanding the actions of homesteaders whose sweat equity, daring and vision are
developers and the availability of mortgage finance. paving the way for those among us who are more timid.
But ... it is apparent that where urban pioneers venture,
the banks, real estate companies the state or other collec-
SMITH'S ATTEMPT TO INTEGRATE
tive economic actors have generally gone before (Smith,
CONSUMPTION INTO GENTRIFICATION 1986, pp. 18-19).
In 1986 Smith attempted to locate the rent gap thesis

But this is not borne out by evidence from London
within a wider analysis of gentrification which
and New York (Zukin, 1987) which indicates that
included the de-industrialization of capitalist econ-
individual pioneers do play a key initial role even if
omies and the growth of white collar employment, and
they may be often overtaken by the banks, real estate
changes in demography and consumption patterns.
agents and developers. Munt (1987) argued that in
This appeared to herald a significant widening of his
Battersea, London, 'a gradual process of infiltration
approach, and Smith noted that 'although previous
by gentrifiers ... preceeded any large scale develop-
attempts at explanation have tended to fasten on one
ment' (p. 1177). Contrary to Smith, there is a strong
or the other trend, they may not in factcase
be that
mutually
where the collective economic actors
exclusive (p. 21). This is an important concession, but
venture, urban pioneers have often gone before
Smith's view regretably remained firmly production
(Goetze, 1979).
based, viewing demographic and cultural processes
In 1987 in a major paper entitled 'Of yuppies and
as epiphenomenon or surface froth. As he revealingly
housing: gentrification, social restructuring and the
put it:
urban dream', Smith attempted to tackle the social
changes in demographic patterns and life-style pref- restructuring and consumption arguments head on.
erences are not completely irrelevant, but ... the import- Looking first at the evidence for the existence of a 'new
ance of demographic and life-style issues seems to be middle class', Smith accepted that there has been an
chiefly in the determination of the surface form taken by undeniable occupational transformation, with 'pro-
much of the urban restructuring rather than explaining fessional, managerial and upper level administrative
184 CHRIS HAMNETT
personnel in expanding sectors

Smith's argument is a fascinating one. Having he
among gentrifiers'
accepted that demand (Smith,
can play a role in altering the 1987
argued that this does
nature of production, henot
then avoids theprove
consequences the
middle class in Marxist
of this admission by arguingterms
that the conundrum of (i.e. in
ship and control of
gentrification does the
not turn on wheremeans
demand comes of
correct, but as from,
the but on whysocial restructu
it takes the locational form it does.
marily concerned with
This question is fundamental occupation
for the explanation of c
theoretical validity of
gentrification. But Marxist
it is only half the issue. The con- class
largely irrelevant and
undrum of gentrification Smith
turns on both the expla- app
nation of where'class'
existence of a new middle class demand comes
in from and
empiri
terms of Marxiston its manifestation
class in the theory.
central and inner cities. As h
Smith however identifies the second question as the
There is no key one. He argues
doubt thatthat: employme
changed dramatically and that a profo
There can be little doubt
turing is taking place... andthat a continued
that and even it is
accelerated centralization Equally,
configuration of society. of administrative, executive,
this
is heavily implicated
professional,in the
managerial and somegentrificat
service activities may
1987a, p. 161). make a central domicile more desirable for a substantial
sector of the middle class. But do these arguments really
amount to an explanation of the geographical reversal
But while Smith accepted the 'overarching import-
of the location habits by a proportion of middle-class
ance' of the new work on social restructuring for
men and women? ... the argument that social restructur-
explaining gentrification he argued that: ing is the primary impetus behind gentrification is
substantially underdetermined (Smith, 1987a, p. 164).
they also bring certain intrinsic dangers with them. If
gentrification is to be explained first and foremost as the result
Smith is correct in arguing that social restructuring
of the emergence of a new social group ... then it becomes
alone is not an adequate explanation of gentrification.
difficult to avoid at least a tacit subscription to some sort of
But, as we have seen, the proponents of the social
consumer preference model, no matter how watered down.
restructuring thesis do not argue that it is. On the
How else does this new social group bring about gentri-
fication except by demanding specifc kinds and locations
contrary, they all point to the crucial role of the
of housing in the market' (Smith, 1987a, p. 163 added specific cultural and consumption requirements of a
emphases). fragment of the new class, and argue that they are met
by an inner city location. There is a causal link between
the production of a new professional and managerial
Smith's fears are very clear, and they shape his
labour force, the cultural and consumption character-
attempt to resolve his problem of accepting the exist-
istics of part of that group, and the creation of potential
ence of a new social group without giving them a key
gentrifiers. There are two steps to the argument, not
role in the gentrification process. His 'solution' is
one, but Smith only acknowledges the first and dis-
ingeneous and highlights what is perhaps the key
misses the second. Not surprisingly, Smith concludes
problem in the explanation of gentrification: namely that:
its spatial manifestation. He states:
I would defend the rent-gap analysis ... not as in itself a

There is no argument but that demand can at times - and definitive or complete explanation but as the necessary center-
especially those times when demand changes dramati- piece to any theory of gentrification. It is the historical
cally - alter the nature of production. But the conundrum patterns of capital investment and disinvestment in the
of gentrification does not turn on explaining where middle central and inner city cities that establishes the oppor-
class demand comes from. Rather, it turns on explaining the tunity (not the necessity) for this spatial reversal in the
essentially geographical question of why central and inner first place (Smith, 1987a, p. 165 emphases added).
areas of cities, which for decades could not satisfy the demands
of the middle class, now appear to do so handsomely. If,
indeed, demand structures have changed, we need to This statement represents a substantial retreat from
explain why these changed demands have led to a spatial Smith's initial position, and presupposes what Badcock
re-emphasis on the central and inner city (Smith, 1987a, (1989, p. 126) has termed 'a considerable relaxation of
pp. 163-4 emphases added). the theory's original assumptions'. Smith now seems
to view the rent gap as a key which translates
process. more
But such differences aside, the fact that Smith
general processes, i.e. the production of gentrifiers
had to undertake this reinterpretation is indicative of
into a spatial reversal. But Smith's argument
the that
limitations of the rent the
gap theory of gentrification
rent gap is the necessary centrepieceand Smith's
to any fundamental
theory of unwillingness to concede
that Smith
gentrification is too large a claim. As individuals have anyout,
points significant role in shaping
the rent gap establishes the opportunity,
their environment. not the
Yet the closest Smith can bring
necessity, for a spatial reversal to himself
occur.toThe go is to acceptgap
rent the role of collective social
may provide the means, but it actors doesand not provide
the functional a
requirements of differen-
tiatedneed
motive for gentrification. For this, we consumption
to lookin new mode of regulation. It is not
into
what is, for Smith, the heart of that
darkness:
Smith refuseslocational
to grant individual agency domi-
nance - this is not the argument - but that he seems to
preferences, lifestyles and consumption.
Given that Smith finds any emphasis
refuse toon individual
accept it even exists at anything other than a
life styles and consumption unacceptable; in
superficial level. His1987 heto any form of agency
opposition
explanation
outlined a way of trying to integrate reveals him as a structuralist for whom
production-side
and consumption-side argumentsindividual
vis-a-vis agency is reduced to the role of flickering
gentrifi-
cation in terms of a historical analysis of by
shadows cast societal
the light ofre-capital's fire.
structuring. This entailed rejection of Ley's ideas
about post-industrialism as a 'shallow empirical
abstraction ... incapable of sustaining
TOWARDS theoretical
AN INTEGRATED THEORY OF
scrutiny' (Smith, 1987a, p. 166) while reinterpreting
GENTRIFICATION
the substance of the consumption society argument
It has
in terms of the 'regulationist' analysis ofbeen argued that
Aglietta. It is both the social restructur
argued that as the intensive regime thesis
ofassociated with Ley and the rent gap th
accumulation
began to fray at the edges in the 1970s by
advanced and 1980s,
Smith are partial attempts to exp
there has been a switch towards agentrification. Ley's approach focused on change
new (post-Fordist)
the social
regime of accumulation associated not with and spatial
mass pro-divison of labour, change
duction and consumption, but with differentiated
occupational structure, the creation of cultural a
environmental
production and consumption. In this new demands
regimeand their
of transmission into
accumulation, the accent is on product-differentiation
the housing market via the greater purchasing power
and niche markets. Gentrification of
is the new class. He
explained inlargely
these took for granted the
existence of potential
terms as a result of the desire of gentrifiers areas suitable for gentrification
to differen-
tiate themselves from other social
and groups. Asprimarily
saw the process Smithin terms of housing
notes: market demand. Smith on the other hand focused on
the production of gentrifiable housing through the
It is this question of cultural differentiation in a mass
mechanism of the rent gap. He took for granted the
market which is most relevant to gentrification. Gentrifi-
existence of a supply of potential gentrifiers and
cation is a redifferentiation of the cultural social and
ignored the question of why a segment of the new class
economic landscape ... gentrification and the mode of
opted to locate in the inner city. Mullins, Moore,
consumption it engenders are an integral part of class
constitution; they are part of the means employed by
Beauregard and Rose argued that an understanding of
new middle class individuals to distinguish themselves the production of gentrifiers and their social and cul-
from the ... bourgeoise above and the working class tural characteristics was of crucial importance for an
below (Smith, 1987, pp. 167-8). understanding of gentrification. They developed
Ley's thesis considerably and argued that gentrifiers
What Smith has done is to reinterpret, in terms ofare central to the gentrification process. Without
regulationist theory, Ley's work on post-industrial them, the process cannot occur at all. But gentrifi-
consumption. But Smith's interpretation of con- cation is not simply a product of changes in the social
sumption and its role in gentrification is clearly veryand spatial division of labour, crucial though this has
different from that suggested by Ley and others. By been. A specific locational orientation towards the
stressing the importance of consumption within theinner city or specific housing areas within it, is also
framework of capital accumulation he attempted tonecessary and a supply of gentrifiable areas and
circumvent the theoretical dangers inherent in givinghousing defined not just in terms of the existence of a
individual gentrifiers a key role in the gentrification rent gap, but also in terms of relative desirability or
186 CHRIS HAMNETT
attractiveness and
to spatialthe
divisions ofpotential
labour which have led to de-g
industrialization of advanced capitalist economies
1987, pp. 1195-6).
There are four andrequirements
the growth of the service sector. This, infor turn, has
occur on a significant
been associated with the
scale.
rapid expansion Theof the pro-
f
fessional and managerial
cerned, respectively, with servicetheclass, and supp
the con-
centration the
for gentrification, of key financial,
supply legal and otheroffunctions
po
in a relatively
and the existence small number of major citiescent
of attractive such as
environments. London
They and New York and Paris and a number of
comprise the
side elements other the
of major cities equation.
such as Vancouver, Toronto,The
Sydney and
involves a cultural San Francisco. It is in these cities
preference that
for i
gentrification has of
by a certain segment been most
themarked. service
possible to conceive
The explanationof a range
for gentrification must therefore of
depending on thebegin with the processes responsible for the produc-
combination of th
The range of outcomes are
tion and concentration of key fractions of the show
service
important point class in
toa number of major cities. Thesefrom
emerge processes
gentrification only
have produced theoccurs
pool of potential gentrifiers,
under and o
circumstances. None of must
the primary emphasis the be on theother
explanation of co
the expansion of this key group.
gentrification, although Ley This is not a con-
would
occur without a sumption
rent based explanation.
gapIt isas firmlylong
based in the as
changes in the structure
the purchasing power to of production
displace and the social or
users.
and spatial division of labour in advanced capitalist
countries.
TABLE I. Conditions for gentrification schema It is then necessary to explain why gentrifi-
cation occurs in some of these cities. As we have seen,
two conditions are necessary. First, it is necessary to
Rent No Rent
gap exists gap exists

have a supply of potentially gentrifiable inner city
property. This is where rent gap theory comes in,
explaining why a supply of devalued inner city prop-
No potential No gentrification No gentrification
gentrifiers
erty exists as a result of prior suburbanization and
dencentralization. The potential value of this prop-
Supply of potential
gentrifiers exists
erty is greater than its current value. But, as we have
seen, the existence of a rent gap does not necessarily
No inner city demand No gentrification No gentrification
lead to gentrification. Without the existence of a pool
Inner city preference Gentrification Gentrification?
of potential gentrifiers and available mortgage
by a section of the
'new class' finance, gentrification will not occur however great
the rent gap and however great the desire of devel-
opers to make it happen. And where appropriate
inner city housing stock does not exist in sufficient
But this is merely a classification of circumstances.
quantity,
It does not, of itself, provide a basis of a theory of as for example in cities such as Dallas,
Pheonix and other new southern and western US
gentrification. And, as we have seen, the key question
cities, gentrification may be very limited, however
for such a theory is its starting point. It is inadequate
to argue that gentrification is the result of alarge the new service class. In older north-eastern
combi-
nation of circumstances without attempting toAmerican
assign cities such as Baltimore, Philadelphia and
Washington
some theoretical priority to those circumstances. I D.C., on the other hand, there is an
have no doubt that, as Beauregard has argued, that supply of nineteenth century row housing,
abundant
'the explanation for gentrification begins with muchthe of it devalued and run-down and home to
working
presence of gentrifiers' and that 'gentrification is class and minority populations. In such cities
gentrification has proceeded apace.
defined by the presence of gentrifiers' (Beauregard,
1986). But this does not mean that culture and Secondly,
con- there has to be some effective demand
for inner
sumption are assigned first place in the explanation of city property from potential gentrifiers.
gentrification. As Ley, Mullins and othersThis havemay result from financial inability to afford a
suburban
pointed out, the appropriate place to start is with the home or, as is more commonly argued, it
changes in the structure of production and the may stem from a preference to live in the inner city
social
close to central city jobs and social'choice, consumption
and cultural and culture' side of the deb
facili-
ties. This, in turn, depends on both
has, inthe
fact,growth
always had of
one foot very firmly plan
in the realities
service class job opportunities downtown, andof changes
on in the material base
demographic and lifestyle changes which and
production haveits seen
cultural manifestations.
large numbers of women enter the Inlabour
some ways,
forcetheandconflict has been between t
growing numbers of both single interpretations
households and ofdual
production. The one looking
career childless couples. For these groups,
changes inwith
the social
a highand spatial division of labour
disposable income, inner city locations
the production
offer proximity
of gentrifiers, and the other lookin
to employment and to restaurants, arts andof
the production other
the built environment. But, u
recently,
facilities. Not surprisingly, a significant Smith has of
proportion consistently interpreted t
them appear to have opted for inner former
cityapproach
residence
in terms
in of individual consumpti
those cities where city centre socialculture and choice,
and cultural and has generally rejected wha
facili-
had
ties exist. Without this effective to offer. based
demand, And this,
in as we have seen, has b
large part on a positive orientation considerable. Smith and
towards central has recently accepted that it
inner city living, gentrification is unlikely
important to to occurproduction and consumpt
integrate
however large the army of potential gentrifiers
but this andstill been in terms of a fra
integration has
however large the rent gap. work which either ascribes primacy to questions
We are therefore faced by three production
sets of conditions
or re-interprets consumption in a col
all of which are necessary, and tive
none of which areway. Smith's conception
non-problematic
individual action
sufficient. But it is clear that the existence of a is a limited and circumscribed one
poten-
He and
tial pool of gentrifiers is logically accepts that collective social actors can ma
theoretically
prior to the housing preferencesgentrification,
and lifestyles butofnota a multiplicity of individ
sub-group of the service class. And, while
actors. If thethe exist-
criticism of Ley's position has been m
ence of a supply of appropriate inner-city
limited, it is houses is
partly because he has said less and b
necessary for gentrification to occur, the
far less existence
assertive of
in his claims for theoretical prima
It is gentrification.
a rent gap will not, of itself, produce also clear that hisItinitial recognition of the
is thus difficult to accept Smith'srole
view
of athat the rent
new group of potential gentrifiers with th
specific
gap is 'the necessary centerpiece to any cultural
theory and
oflocational requirements
gentrification'. Necessary it may broadly
be, but correct. His sins have been of omission rat
if gentrifi-
cation theory has a centrepiece itthan
mustcommission.
rest on theThe supply of dwellings and
role of developer/speculators
conditions for the production of potential gentrifiers. in the process h
gone largely unexamined by Ley. They are seen
being largely derived from the demands from the n
CONCLUSIONS
class.
I have attempted to show that the debateSmith's overclaim,
the that gentrification is a structural
explanation of gentrification has been broadly
product ofshaped
the land and housing markets alone, can
by the conflict between those who have now argued
be seenthat
to have been misplaced as Smith now
the key to the problem lies in global changespartially in theThis is not to say that the rent gap
accepts.
structure of production and the socialthesis andwas spatial
wrong. The point is rather that the rent gap
division of labour, and in the concentration in specific
explains, at best, half the problem, and probably less.
cities of a section of the 'new middle class'The
orexistence
'service' of relatively cheap and devalued hous-
class with a particular demographic composition, andbut far from sufficient element of an
ing is a necessary,
cultural and consumption orientation. On the other
explanation. Equally, explanation of the production
hand Smith has consistently argued for the ofkey rolegentrifiers,
potential of their culture, consumption
investment and disinvestment in the builtand environ-
reproduction is necessary but insufficient. A com-
ment and for an approach based on theprehensive
primacy andofintegrated explanation of gentrifi-
profitability. This conflict has manifested itself
cation must in a
necessarily involve the explanation of
variety of ways. In a conflict between so-called
where gentrifiers come from and why they gentrify,
'supply' and 'demand' explanations, choice andareas
how the cul-and properties to be gentrified are
producedmany
ture versus capital and so on. Yet, I have argued and how the two are linked. And there is
of these dualisms and polarities have abeen
strongmore
case that, notwithstanding the role of
institutional
apparent than real and what Smith would label theand collective social actors such as real
188 CHRIS HAMNETT
School of Social Sciences, The

estate agents, developers and Australian
mor Natio
key actors in the gentrification
University, Canberra. Versions were given at
Institute of British
individual gentrifiers Geographers Confere
themselves.
University of Glasgow,
accept that individual agency January 1990
isand imat
planation of gentrification and
workshop on European Gentrification, to
Departm
production andof consumption not19
Geography, University of Utrecht, January
turalcauses or individual effects,
am grateful for comments but
on the draft paper f
Blair Badcock,
tures and individual University of Adelaide, St
agency.
Because Smith Borassa, Urban Research Unit,
developed rentANU, Tim Butl
gap
been vigorous in Polytechnic of East London, Davidmaki
its defence, Ley and N
and concessions
Smith.where necessar
The usual disclaimers apply.
seeking to ensure its continuing
explanation of gentrification. Bu
accepted that changes
REFERENCES
in the social
of labour and the concentration o
managerial employment in the dow
BADCOCK, B. (1989) 'An Australian view of the rent gap
siderable importance, and has atte
hypothesis', Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr. 79: 125-45
theconsumption patterns of gentrifi
BEAUREGARD, R. A. (1984) 'Structure, agency, and urban
he has done this in insuch
redevelopment', a Cities
SMITH, M. P. (ed.) way in trans-
functional requirement of
formation, vol. 26, Urban late
Affairs capit
Annual Reviews (Sage,
recognition of the
London) pp.role
51-72 of individ
agency. But
Smith's
BEAUREGARD, interventions
R. A. (1986) 'The chaos and complexity in
of
debate have not gentrification',
been in SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds)
counterprodu
trary,only by The gentrification of the city (Allen andthe
challenging Unwin, London)
so
pp. 35-55
preference theories and his advo
BERRY, B. J. L. (1985) 'Islands of renewal in seas of decay',
coherent alternative, has the de
in Pederson, P. (ed.) The new urban reality (The Brookings
ations advanced as far as it has. Pr
Institute, Washington, D.C.)
and Smith pioneered radically diff
BODDY, M. (1976) 'The structure of mortgage finance:
interpretations building
ofsocieties gentrification,
and the British social formation', Trans.
to advance our understanding
Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S. 1: 58-71 of t
ing how the twoCLARK, E.partial explanatio
(1988) 'The rent gap and transformation of the
built environment:
their work has been case studies in Malmo 1860-1985',
shown to be lim
respects and they Geografiska Annaler
have 70B: 241-54 had to am
CYBRIWSKY, price
ations, this is the R. A., LEY, D. and WESTERN,
paid J. (1986) by th
Neither may have 'The politics and social construction of revitalized
recognized the
neighbourhoods: Society Hill, Philadelphia and False
trification at first, but they each id
Creek, Vancouver', in SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS, P.
of its anatomy, and other resear
(eds) Gentrification of the City (Allen & Unwin, London)
quently been able to
pp. 92-120 piece together
explanation. As Clark
DINGEMANS, (1988)
D. J. (1978) 'Redlining and mortgage conc
We should stop lending

askingin Sacramento, Ca.', Ana.
the Ass. Am. Geogr. 69:
one-dim
225-39
'Which theory of gentrification is t
DUNCAN, J. and LEY, D. (1982) Structural marxism
theory, the post-industrial restructu
consumer demand humanfor geography:amenities
a critical assessment. Ann.the
Ass. A
Geogr. 72: 30-59
tutionalist theory?', and start asking 'If i
GOETZE, R. (1979) Understanding neighbourhood ch
empirical support for all these theori
an understanding (Ballinger,
of Coalbridge,
the ways Mass.) in wh
GREGORY,
logical relation of D. (1981) 'Human agency and human geo
complementarity?'
original). phy'. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. N.S. 6: 1-18
HAMNETT, C. (1984) 'Gentrification and resident
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS location theory: a review and assessment', in HERBE
D. T. and JOHNSTON, R. J. (eds) Geography and the ur
This paper was written while the author wasenvironment.
a visiting Progress in research and applicatio
research fellow at the Urban Research Unit, Research
vol. 6 (John Wiley, London) pp. 283-319
HAMNETT, C. and RANDOLPH W. (1986)
ROSE, D. 'Landlord dis-
(1989) 'A feminist perspective on employment
restructuring and gentrification:
investment and housing market transformation: the flat the case of Montreal', in
break-up market in London', in WILLIAMS,
WOLCH, J. and DEAR, P. M.
and(eds) The power of geography:
SMITH, N. (eds) Gentrification of thehow
cityterritory shapes Allen
(George social life (Unwin Hyman, London)
and Unwin, London) pp. 121-52 pp. 118-38
HAMNETT, C. and RANDOLPH, W. (1987)
SCHAFFER,Cities, housing
R. and SMITH, N. (1986) 'The gentrification of
and profits (Hutchinson, London) Harlem?', Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr. 76: 347-65
HARTMAN, C. (1979) 'Comment on SMITH, A. (1989) 'Gentrification
neighbourhood re- and the spatial con-
stitution
vitalization and displacement: a review of the of the State: the restructuring of London's
evidence',
]. Am. Plan. Ass. 45: 488-94 Docklands', Antipode 21: 232-60
SMITH, N.
HARVEY, D. (1974) Class monopoly rent, (1979) 'Toward
finance a theory of gentrification: a
capital
and the urban revolution. Reg. Stud. 8:
back239-55
to the city movement by capital, not people', J. Am.
Plan.
HARVEY, D. (1978) 'The urban process Ass. 45: 538-48
under capitalism:
a framework for analysis', Int. J. Urb. SMITH,
Reg.N. Res.
(1982)2:
'Gentrification
101-31 and uneven develop-
101-31 ment', Econ. Geogr. 58: 139-55
HOYT, H. (1939) The structure and growth of SMITH, N. (1986) 'Gentrification, the frontier, and the re-
residential
neighbourhoods in American cities (Federal Housing
structuring of urban space, in SMITH, N. and WILLIAMS,
Administration, Washington D.C.) P. (eds) Gentrification of the city (Allen and Unwin,
KING, R. J. (1989c) 'Capital switching and theLondon)
role of pp. 15-34
ground rent: 3. Switching, between circuits, SMITH,
switchingN. (1987a) 'Of yuppies and housing: gentrification,
social restructuring
between submarkets, and social change, Environ. Plann. A and the urban dream', Society and
21: 853-80 Space 5: 151-72
LEGATES, R. T. and HARTMAN, C. (1986) 'The anatomy
SMITH, N. (1987b) 'Gentrification and the rent gap', Ann.
Ass. N.
of displacement in the United States', in SMITH, Am.and
Geogr. 77: 462-78
SMITH,
WILLIAMS, P. (eds) The gentrification of the city N. (1987c)
(Allen and 'Dangers of the empirical turn', Antipode
Unwin, London), pp. 178-203 19: 59-68
SMITH,
LEY, D. (1978) 'Inner city resurgence units societal N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds) (1986) Gentrification of
context',
the city (Allen and Unwin, London)
mimeo, paper presented to the AAG Annual Conference,
New Orleans STERNLIEB, G. and HUGHES, J. W. (1983) 'The uncertain
LEY, D. (1980) 'Liberal ideology and post-industrial city', future of the central city', Urban Affairs Quart. 18:
Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr. 70: 238-58 455-72
LEY, D. (1981) 'Inner city revitalization in Canada: aSUMKA, H. (1979) 'Neighbourhood revitalization and
Vancouver case study', Canadian Geogr. 25: 124-48 placement: a review of the evidence', ]. Am. Plan. Ass. 4
LEY, D. (1986) Alternative explanations for inner city 480-7
gentrification: A Canadian assessment. Ann. Ass. Am.WALKER, R. and GREENBERG, D. (1982) 'Post-industr
Geogr. 76: 521-35 ism and political reform in the city: a critique', Antipod
LEY, D. (1987) Reply: the rent gap revisited. Ann. Ass. Am. 14: 17-32
Geogr. 77: 465-68 WILLIAMS, P. (1978) 'Building societies and the inner city
MARCUSE, P. (1986) 'Abandonment, gentrification and Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 3: 23-34
displacement: the linkages in New York City', in SMITH, WILLIAMS, P. (1984) 'Economic processes and urba
N. and WILLIAMS, P. (eds) The gentrification of the city change: an analysis of contemporary patterns of residen-
(Allen and Unwin, London) pp. 153-177 tial restructuring', Austr. Geogr. Stud. 22: 39-5 7
MOORE, P. W. (1982) 'Gentrification and the residentialWOLFE, J., DROVER, G. and SKELTON, I. (1980) 'Inner
geography of the New Class, mimeo, Scarborough city real estate activity in Montreal: institutional charac-
College, Univ. of Toronto teristics of decline', Canadian Geogr. 24: 348-67
MULLINS, P. (1982) 'The 'middle-class' and the inner city', ZUKIN, S. (1982) Loft living: culture and capital in urb
J. Australian Polit. Econ. 11, 44-58 change, (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore)
MUNT, I. (1987) 'Economic restructuring, culture and gen-ZUKIN, S. (1987) 'Gentrification: culture and capital in th
trification: a case study of Battersea, London, Environ. urban core', Am. Rev. Sociology 13: 129-47
Plann. A 19: 1175-97
ROSE, D. (1984) 'Rethinking gentrification: beyond the
uneven development of marxist urban theory', Society
and Space 2: 47-74

Hamnett, (1991) Blind Men and The Elephant

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hamnett, (1991) Blind Men and The Elephant

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Blind Men and the Elephant: The Explanation of Gentrification

Author(s): Chris Hamnett

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is

The blind men and the elephant: the explanation

Revised MS received 2 January, 1991

KEY WORDS: Gentrification, Theory, Production, Consumption, Housing, Residential change

INTRODUCTION novel and potentially interesting city-spec

the revitalization The

focuses on the production of gentrifiers and their CRITERIA FOR EXPLANATION

associated cultural, consumption and reproductive

It is clear from these

approach to gentrification and

its explanation 1979, p.the

Smith's solutioncorrect (see Moor

In 1986 Smith attempted to locate the rent gap thesis

personnel in expanding sectors

I would defend the rent-gap analysis ... not as in itself a

gap exists gap exists

School of Social Sciences, The

We should stop lending

You might also like