The Negative Effects of Gentrification on Low Income Citizens

ECONOMIC DISPLACEMENT: IF MINNESOTA IS SO NICE, WHY IS IT SO BAD FOR SOMALI-AMERICAN FAMILIES?

Abstract

An unfortunate but purportedly intentional concomitant of urban renewal has been the displacement of lower-income, usually minority members of urban communities in a process termed “gentrification.” While these same types of processes have been taking place through humankind’s history, gentrification has become especially pronounced in recent years as investors have targeted depressed neighborhoods for revitalization to the point where the residents are no longer able to afford to live there. In response, there have been growing calls for greater local government involvement to prevent already marginalized citizens from becoming the unwilling victims of gentrification. This capstone project provides a review of the relevant literature concerning gentrification and how this process has adversely affected minority communities in general and the Somali-American residents Minneapolis’ Ward 6 district. A survey of these residents and the findings that emerged are following by a summary of the research findings and the insights that resulted. Finally, based on these findings, the capstone project concludes with an informed answer to the guiding research question together with salient urban planning recommendations that are specifically applicable to Ward 6 but which are also generalizable to other communities facing the gentrification juggernaut today.

Keywords: Gentrification, Somalia, Somali-Americans, Immigration

Research Question: This study was guided by the following research question: “What happens to Somali-American families that decide to remain in gentrifying areas?”

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract, Keywords and Research Question …………………………………………..

Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………..

List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………..

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………..

Literature Review …………………………………………………………………..

Research Methodology …………………………………………………………..

Research Findings …………………………………………………………………..

Conclusion and Recommendations …………………………………………………..

Bibliography …………………………………………………………………………..

Introduction

This capstone project is about Somali-American communities and the framework of economic displacement/gentrification in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul community with a particular focus on Cedar-Riverside neighborhood. The Cedar Riverside neighborhoods in Minneapolis have been referred to as “little Mogadishu” due to their significant presence in an otherwise largely white municipality. With more than 25,000 Somalis, the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood is home to the largest population of Somali-American immigrant residents in the United States and the ninth-largest population of East-African immigrants nationwide.

Not surprisingly, Cedar-Riverside is an astonishing hub of Somali culture that I still hold dear to my heart. Unfortunately, in recent years, it has fallen victim to the same gentrification processes that had already adversely affected and threatened the residential security of its preexisting low-income residents. This problem has been highlighted by the local mainstream media as well. For example, according to Adam Belz, who covers Minneapolis City Hall for the Star Tribune “Minneapolis and St. Paul have both gentrified considerably over the past 15 years, with rent outpacing income and more wealthy people attracted to the center of Minneapolis and nearby neighborhoods, and blocks along the Green Line in St. Paul.”

These trends therefore beg the question, “What happens to Somali-American families that decide to remain in gentrifying areas? In sum, Somali-American families that decide to stay gentrifying areas like Minneapolis Ward 6 may find themselves further “economically and publicly marginalized” as discussed further in the chapters that follow based on the goal of developing a timely and informed answer to the project’s guiding research question, “What happens to Somali-American families that decide to remain in gentrifying areas?”

Literature Review

Recent Gentrification Trends in the United States

The overarching goal of national economic development is the sustained improvement of the standard of living of citizens together with opportunities for upward mobility and security from external threats, all with a focus on bettering the quality of life for all. For instance, according to the World Economic Forum, “The ultimate objective of national economic performance is broad-based and sustained progress in living standards, a concept that encompasses wage and non-wage income as well as economic opportunity, security and quality of life. This is the bottom-line basis on which a society evaluates the economic dimension of its country’s leadership.”[footnoteRef:2] It would therefore appear reasonable to posit that the economic development of depressed neighborhoods is highly consistent with this worthwhile objective, a process that has been termed “gentrification.” According to the legal definition provided by Black’s Law Dictionary, gentrification is “a term used in land development to describe a trend whereby previously underdeveloped areas become revitalized as persons of relative affluence invest in homes and begin to upgrade the neighborhood economically.”[footnoteRef:3] [2: “The Inclusive Growth and Development Report” (2017). World Economic Forum, p. 4.] [3: Black’s Law Dictionary (1990). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., p. 657.]

Although this definition connotes a benign and even beneficent process whereby a rising tide raises all boats, the harsh reality of the gentrification process has been the displacement of millions of lower-income Americans who have few other housing options available to them. Moreover, the process of gentrification is becoming virtually ubiquitous across the country, and a growing body of evidence indicates that lower-income residents are being specifically targeted by land developers who are intent on reaping the profits that can be achieved through the gentrification of depressed neighborhoods.[footnoteRef:4] Although these same types of trends are taking place in other countries around the world, gentrification has become especially pronounced in the United States over the past decade.[footnoteRef:5] [4: SJ Harden, E Davis and L Orozco (2018) “It's Complicated: Placemaking and Gentrification” Journal of the American Planning Association. Online: available >https://www.planning.org/events/nationalconferenceactivity/9140536/>, p. 3.] [5: M Janoschka, J Sequera, and L Salinas (8 July 2013) “Gentrification in Spain and Latin America — a Critical Dialogue.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38(4): 1234.]

While some types of levels of gentrification have taken place for millennia, indeed since time immemorial, the term was only introduced during the latter half of the 20th century to refer to the use of urban renewal to revitalize economically depressed communities.[footnoteRef:6] Since the 1960s, gentrification has accelerated in pace in cities such as Minneapolis-St. Paul, garnering increasing focus from critics who maintain the process invariably places lower-income residents at a disadvantage to the point where they are involuntarily displaced, frequently with few viable low-cost housing alternatives available.[footnoteRef:7] Indeed, even the growing body of scholarship concerning gentrification underscores the invariable displacement of already marginalized residents as a direct result of the process. Indeed, some gentrification opponents maintain that the term “gentrification” is simply a more refined and less threatening way of referring to “displacement.”[footnoteRef:8] [6: E Kirkland (2008, Summer). “What's race got to do with it? Looking for the racial dimensions of gentrification.” The Western Journal of Black Studies, 32(2), 19.] [7: Lehrer, U & Wieditz, T (2009, Summer). “Condominium development and gentrification: The relationship between policies, building activities and socio-economic development in Toronto.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 18(1), 140-144.] [8: Osman, S (2011). The Invention of Brownstone Brooklyn: Gentrification and the Search for Authenticity in Postwar New York. New York: Oxford University Press, 37.]

This assertion is also aligned with the more recent definition offered by Maly who reports that, “Gentrification is a process by which the poor and working-class neighborhoods in the inner city are refurbished via an influx of private capital and middle-class home-buyers and renters — in neighborhoods that had previously experienced disinvestment and [an] exodus.”[footnoteRef:9] Since the “exodus” from affected communities is typically comprised primarily of lower-income minority members and the “influx of private capital and middle-class home-buyers and renters” are generally white, the inexorable process of gentrification also involves fundamental changes in the sociodemographic makeup of targeted communities.[footnoteRef:10] [9: Maly, MT (2005). Beyond Segregation: Multiracial and Multiethnic Neighborhoods in the United States. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 240-241.] [10: DF Keene and MB Padilla (2010, Fall). “Leaving Chicago for Iowa's ‘fields of opportunity’: Community dispossession, rootlessness, and the quest for somewhere to ‘be OK.’" Human Organization, 69(3): 276.]

All of this is not to say, of course, that all low-income minorities have been disadvantaged by gentrification. In fact, there are some cases in which the process has duly benefited minority residents of revitalized communities. It is to say, though, that a problem arises, however, when gentrification is used as a tool to specifically target minorities in an effort to displace them to other venues where they will be less visible and therefore far less influential in the political sphere where they have little or no voice.[footnoteRef:11] Yet another problem arises when governmental officials are either complicit in or ignorant of the machinations of investors who seek to achieve these types of outcomes at the expense of lower-income minority members who lack the resources or expertise that are needed to “fight city hall.” [11: DP Varady (2007, July 1). “There goes the ‘hood’: Views of gentrification from the ground up.” The Town Planning Review, 78(4): 544.]

Clearly, there are some subjective assessments involved in gentrification and the points of view that are advanced depend on who benefits and who is harmed. For instance, for investors and those minority members in gentrifying communities that are sufficiently affluent to remain there, the process is inherently beneficial because it improves the quality of life through the introduction of various amenities that were theretofore unavailable, enhancing property values and attracting yet more investments in the process. The vast majority of residents of gentrifying communities, though, are unable to afford the skyrocketing mortgages and rents that result, and the search is on for anywhere else that is affordable to live – even if it means relocating to communities where the living conditions are even worse than what they had prior to gentrification.[footnoteRef:12] [12: L Freeman (2006). There Goes the ‘Hood: Views of Gentrification from the Ground Up. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 122.]

Few right-thinking observers, however, would likely argue that improving the quality of life in neighborhoods is a bad thing, but many critics of gentrification argue that a “follow-the-money” analysis would likely show that many city officials are unjustly enriched by rampant gentrification in their districts, causing some displaced minority members to suggest that the entire process smacks of “white privilege” and regard gentrification as a “slap in the face” by municipal policymakers.[footnoteRef:13] Even otherwise-well intention urban designers have been implicated in the gentrification debate, with some observers suggesting that the process ignores the long-term societal benefits of the rich cultural offerings of targeted communities such as Minneapolis-St. Paul in favor of more immediate returns on their investment. For instance, Dwyer emphasizes that, “Many developers, eager for profit and armed with the real promise of upgrading the neighborhood, ignore the fact that those displaced people and old buildings once constituted a community that, though poor and in decline, had cultural and spiritual value.”[footnoteRef:14] [13: Varady, 544.] [14: J Dwyer (2009, Summer). “Reimagining the ethnic enclave: Gentrification, roted cosmopolitanism, and Ernesto Quinonez's Chango's fire.” MELUS 34(2): 126.]

Against this backdrop, it is little wonder the many minority residents of gentrifying neighborhoods complain that the collusive process has been used as a means to intentionally displace them from whatever lower-cost housing was available to them in favor of more affluent residents, which is to say white, including the Minneapolis-Saint Paul neighborhoods that are currently home to tens of thousands of Somali immigrants to the United States as discussed further below.

Gentrification in the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Neighborhoods

As noted above, Minneapolis is currently the home to more than 25,000 Somali immigrants representing the largest concentration of population of Somalis in the nation and the largest outside of Africa.[footnoteRef:15] The story concerning how this many immigrants who hail from a country where the climate is consistently hot and humid should find themselves in a state where the climate is so dramatically different is curious, but the fact of the matter is that the people of Minnesota in general and Minneapolis-St. Paul in particular have a long tradition of openly and warmly welcoming newcomers regardless of their points of origin.[footnoteRef:16] The net outcome of this welcoming attitude has been a steady influx of refugees fleeing the political and military turmoil that have wracked their country for decades. As a result, Minneapolis’s Ward 6 district is characterized by a sea of Somali faces as shown in Figure 1. [15: C Cumming (2015, February 13). “Remittances Cut, Somali & U.S. Politicians Demand Action.” American Banker 1(307): 37.] [16: E Boehm (2017, December). “Nothing Good to Eat? Blame Immigration Restrictions.” Reason 49(7): 39.]

Figure 1. Typical Cedar-Riverside neighborhood in Minneapolis

Source: http://www.startribune.com/inside-little-mogadishu-no-one-is-an-outcast/414876214/

This exodus from Somalia to Minneapolis began in the early 1990s when the U.S. government agreed to accept refugees from this country following the collapse of Somalia’s government during an especially bloody civil war that claimed the lived of tens of thousands of civilians and caused the displacement of millions of Somalis.[footnoteRef:17] Over the past 25 years or so, the tens of thousands of Somalis who flocked to Minneapolis have trained and educated themselves, secured meaningful employment and many have established small but thriving businesses and the population has been generally well received by the larger mainstream Minneapolis population as a result Although other parts of the state including Mankato and Saint Cloud also have pockets of Somali immigrants, the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood located between the University of Minnesota's main campus, the Mississippi River and downtown Minneapolis has been the destination of the vast majority of them.[footnoteRef:18] [17: Boehn, 40.] [18: Boehm, 41.]

The assimilation of so many Somali immigrants from a nation with such starkly different weather as well as language, religious and social customs has not been without its challenges, but these types of acculturation processes are characteristic of all newly arrived immigrants. What is especially noteworthy about the Somali population in Minneapolis, though, is just how well these individuals have succeeded in overcoming the many challenges that were arrayed against them to become hard working, contributing and motivated members of Minnesota society today. There are still some problems facing the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood, however, including the fact that Minneapolis prides itself on its low crime rate and this neighborhood’s crime rate is slightly higher. In addition, the unemployment rate (about 13%) for the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood remains twice as high as the city as a whole.[footnoteRef:19] [19: Boehm, 41.]

Compounding these problems is the ever-looming specter of the perception of Somali immigrants as a terrorist threat. This perception was heightened by a terrorism incident at a St. Cloud mall in September 2016 when Dahir Adan, a Somali refugee living in Minneapolis, stabbed 10 employees and shoppers, apparently incentivized by “some sort of inspiration from radical Islamic groups" as explained by James Comey, the FBI director at the time.[footnoteRef:20] In addition, nine other Somali immigrants living in Minneapolis had already been charged earlier in 2017 with conspiring to move to Syria to train with an ISIS contingent in order to carry out terrorist attacks against the United States and its interests abroad in the future. Six of the Somali defendants ended up pleading guilty to the charges and three others were convicted by a federal court. Since that time, the FBI has been investigating the Islamic community in Minneapolis-St. Paul, including Somali immigrants in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood, with a special task force. Other recent incidents – these involving innocent Somali immigrants -- further underscore the growing perception of these individuals as potential terrorists irrespective of any realities to the contrary that are involved. For example, three Somali women at a Walmart service station who were simply pumping gas into their car in Fargo, South Dakota, were recently confronted by a middle-aged white American woman who screamed, “We’re going to kill all of you.”[footnoteRef:21] [20: Boehm, 41.] [21: “Push for hate crimes law after ugly incident in North Dakota.” (September 17, 2017). WTOP. Online available .]

Taken together, it is clear that the 25,000-plus Somali immigrants living in Minneapolis are faced with profoundly severe trends that are making it even more difficult for them to forge new lives as strangers in a strange land. Unfortunately, in the spirit of piling on, these same Somali immigrants are also facing the tide of gentrification that is rolling across the country, displacing millions of similarly situated lower-income residents, most of whom are minority members. These issues are especially pronounced in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood that has been the destination of choice for many Somali immigrants. For instance, according to Adam Belz, who covers Minneapolis City Hall for the Star Tribune “Minneapolis and St. Paul have both gentrified considerably over the past 15 years, with rent outpacing income and more wealthy people attracted to the center of Minneapolis and nearby neighborhoods, and blocks along the Green Line in St. Paul.”

As noted in the introduction, these accelerated urban revitalization trends beg the question with respect to what happens to Somali-American families that decide to remain in gentrifying areas. Based on the research to date, it is reasonable to posit that Somali-American families that decide to stay gentrifying areas like Minneapolis’ Ward 6 may find themselves “economically and publicly marginalized.”

These trends are especially troubling given the otherwise vibrant and thriving cultural happenings that are taking place in the one-half square mile that comprises “Little Mogadishu.” Moreover, some of the younger Somalis in Little Mogadishu have lived for all or most of their lives, and they have strong ties to this community. For example, according to one local Somali resident in Cedar-Riverside, “We have so much history here. We were raised in this neighborhood.”[footnoteRef:22] Likewise, Michael Tolan, an official with the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota, suggests that the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood is a natural cultural enclave given its geographic organization and proximity to the rest of the city. In this regard, Tolan advises that, “Separated from the rest of Minneapolis by the Mississippi River and two freeways, the neighborhood operates like a self-sustaining village. That’s allowed it to develop on its own and retain its character.”[footnoteRef:23] [22: A Shah (March 2, 2017). “Go inside 'Little Mogadishu,' the Somali capital of America.” Star-Tribune. Online: available Mhttp://www.startribune.com/inside-little-mogadishu-no-one-is-an-outcast/414876214/>, 2.] [23: Shah 2.]

Today, the Cedar-Riverside area is home to 8,000 residents — including a large Somali population. Even for those who don’t live there, the place has become a symbol for the Minnesota Somali community, the nation’s largest Somali diaspora. “It has become the place where people congregate,” said Mohamud Noor, who lives next door to the iconic Riverside Plaza towers. “You get a sense of belonging. You don’t feel as if you’re an outsider. Everything that connects to the community happens here.”[footnoteRef:24] These strong cultural ties have been further reinforced by some members of the community coming together to create social centers that are specifically intended to promote a sense of camaraderie and inclusiveness among the Somali residents of the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood. [24: Shah, 2.]

Notwithstanding these strong cultural ties and community, though, the residents of Little Mogadishu are increasingly confronted with the same gentrification trends that have been reshaping the American urban landscape in recent years, and many residents are left wondering what will become of them once their neighborhoods become too expensive for them to remain in what some of them have always known as home. In order to gain some fresh insights concerning their views about gentrification and its effect on them and their families, this capstone project surveyed a number of Cedar-Riverside neighborhood residents and these results are presented in the section following a fuller description of the research methodology used below.

Research Methodology

Research Design

This study used a mixed methodology consisting of a systematic, qualitative review of the relevant secondary literature together with a quantitative analysis using a custom survey instrument. This research methodology is consistent with the guidance provided by Dennis and Harris who report, “Ideally, an effective research project should incorporate both primary and secondary data.”[footnoteRef:25] Face validity of the custom survey was achieved by having the instrument reviewed by classmates, co-workers, family members and friends to ensure that it appeared to collect the type of data that was required to develop an informed and timely answer to the capstone project’s guiding research question set forth above.[footnoteRef:26] [25: C Dennis and L Harris (2002). Marketing the e-Business. London: Routledge, 37. ] [26: WL Neuman (2003). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 5th ed. New York: Allyn & Bacon, 119.]

Data-Gathering Strategy

The custom survey was administered online using the commercial survey service, SurveyMonkey, and subjects were recruited from the population of local, long-time (i.e., >5 years) Somali residents in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood known to the author and through word of mouth. All told, a total of 21 respondents were recruited, consented and completed the survey in time to have their responses included in the data analysis that follows below.

In addition, a series of geographic information survey (GIS) maps using various sociodemographic overlays are also presented to highlight the relatively lower income levels and higher unemployment rates for this community followed by a summary of the research in the concluding chapter together with recommendations based on these findings concerning future gentrification plans for this community. .

Data Analysis

An Excel spreadsheet was used to analyze the statistical data that resulted from the administration of the online survey, with percentage analyses of response rates to the Likert-scaled statements (ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree with a no opinion/don’t know option) presented in tabular and graphic form below.

Research Findings

Part One: Survey results

The respondents were presented with an online version of the following survey instrument:

Please read the definition below before answering any questions. Gentrification is defined by “Maly (2005) as “a process by which the poor and working-class neighborhoods in the inner city are refurbished via an influx of private capital and middle-class home-buyers and renters—in neighborhoods that had previously experienced disinvestment and a middle-class exodus” (pp. 240-241).

Based on this definition, please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements:

Strongly Agree

Agree

No opinion/ don’t know

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Gentrification has an overall positive effect on communities.

Gentrification is an essential step for improving urban communities

More action is needed by local zoning authorities to prevent landlords from evicting tenants in gentrifying neighborhoods

Gentrification should be better managed in order to prevent the displacement of current residents.

Landlords should be able to charge what they want for their properties

Improving a neighborhood justifies the displacement of lower-income residents

Gentrification unjustly targets minorities

Table 1. Summary of survey results

The results presented in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 1 indicate that a majority (13 or 61.57%) of the respondents either strongly disagree or disagree (7 or 33.3% and 6 or 28.57%) with the statement, “Gentrification has an overall positive effect on communities.” Three of the respondents (or 14.29%) used the no opinion/don’t know option, while two respondents (or 9.52%) strongly agreed and three respondents (or 14.29%) agreed with this statement.

Figure 1. Responses to the statement, “Gentrification has an overall positive effect on communities

As indicated in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 2, in response to the statement, “Gentrification is an essential step for improving urban communities,” one each respondent (or 4.76% each) either strongly agreed or agreed while four respondents (or 19.05%) elected to use the no opinion/don’t know option. Conversely, seven respondents (or 28.57%) disagreed and eight respondents (or 33.3%) strongly disagreed that gentrification is an essential step for improving urban communities.

Figure 2. Responses to the statement, “Gentrification is an essential step for improving urban communities”

As shown in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 3, the responses to the statement, ”More action is needed by local zoning authorities to prevent landlords from evicting tenants in gentrifying neighborhoods” showed that a clear majority of the respondents (13 or 61.87%) either strongly agreed or agreed (6 or 28.57% and 7 or 33.3%) while three respondents (or 14.29%) elected to use the no opinion/don’t know option. Three respondents (or 14.29%) also disagreed with this statement and two respondents (or 9.52%) strongly disagreed that more action is needed by local zoning authorities to prevent landlords from evicting tenants in gentrifying neighborhoods.

Figure 3. Responses to the statement, “More action is needed by local zoning authorities to prevent landlords from evicting tenants in gentrifying neighborhoods”

As shown in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 4, in response to the statement, “Gentrification should be better managed in order to prevent the displacement of current residents,” eight each respondents (or 38.1% each) strongly agreed or agreed, while two respondents (or 9.52%) elected to use the no opinion/don’t know option. Just two respondents (or 9.52%) disagreed and one respondent (or 4.76%) strongly disagreed with this statement.

Figure 4. Responses to the statement, “Gentrification should be better managed in order to prevent the displacement of current residents”

As shown in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 5 , in response to the statement, “Landlords should be able to charge what they want for their properties,” two respondents (or 9.52%) strongly agreed and three respondents (or 14.29%) agreed. Four respondents (or 19.05%) elected to use the no opinion/don’t know option in response to this statement, while a majority (6 each respondents or 28.57% each) either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that that landlords should be able to charge what they want for their properties.