(WASHINGTON POST) Emily Badger — Gentrification and displacement have become so intimately linked in how we talk about certain neighborhoods that they’ve begun to fuse together, the one word silently implying the other, “displacement” giving “gentrification” its sinister tone (and, presumably, the premise for questions like this one).
Decades of research on revitalizing neighborhoods, however, have left a messy and conflicting record on this front. A thorough recent paper published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, written by academics at UCLA and Berkeley, corrals everything we’ve learned about who — and how many people — gentrification may harm into a single unsatisfying lump. Its conclusion:
Previous studies have failed to build a cumulative understanding of displacement because they have utilized different definitions, compared different populations, and adopted a relatively short timeframe; there is not even agreement on what constitutes a significant effect.