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 humankinds 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

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 projects 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 countrys 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 Blacks 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: Blacks 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 pointwhere 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...…on communities. Three of the respondents (or 14.29%) used the no opinion/dont 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/dont 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/dont 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 curret residents, eight each respondents (or 38.1% each) strongly agreed or agreed, while two respondents (or 9.52%) elected to use the no opinion/dont 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/dont 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.

Figure 5. Responses to the statement, Landlords should be able to charge what they want for their properties

As shown in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 6, a clear majority of the respondents (17 or 80.9%) either strongly disagreed (9 or 42.86% or disagreed (8 or 38.1%) with the penultimate statement, Improving a neighborhood justifies the displacement of lower-income residents, while three respondents (or 14.29%) elected to use the no opinion/dont know option. Just one respondent (or 4.75%) agreed and none of the respondents strongly agreed that improving a neighborhood justifies the displacement of lower-income residents.

Figure 6. Responses to the statement, Improving a neighborhood justifies the displacement of lower-income residents

As shown in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 7, the responses to the final statement, Gentrification unjustly targets minorities showed that a large majority of the respondents (15 or 71.4%) either strongly agreed (7 or 33.3%) or agreed (8 or 38.1%) with the statement, Gentrification unjustly targets minorities while three respondents (or 14.29%) elected to use the no opinion/dont know option. Just two respondents (or 9.52%) disagreed and one respondent (or 4.76%) strongly disagreed that gentrification unjustly targets minorities.

Figure 7. Responses to the statement, Gentrification unjustly targets minorities

Part Two: GIS data and surveys

Figure 8. Geographic location of the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood in Minneapolis

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

The Cedar-Riverside neighborhood appears in the upper-right quadrant of the series of GIS overlay maps that are presented below. This data is based on the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates (adjusted to fit current neighborhood boundaries using the 2010 Census counts).

Figure 9. GIS overlay depicting percentage of foreign-born residents (2012-2016)

Figure 10. Percentage of residents living in poverty (2012-2016)

Figure 11. Proportion of adult residents (aged 18-64 years) working (2012-2016)

Figure 12. Median household income (2012-2016 in 2016 dollars)

Source for Figures 9 through12: http://www.mncompass.org/profiles/neighborhoods/ minneapolis-saint-paul#!percent-in-poverty

As can be seen from the GIS overlays in Figures 9 through 12, the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood is disadvantaged in virtually all sociodemographic categories, with an unemployment rate around double the city as a whole with correspondingly lower household income levels and higher rates of poverty.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Conclusion

The research showed that gentrification is defined in various ways, but all definitions include the fact that lower-income residents of affected communities are displaced by more affluent members of the community, typically without regard to where those who are displaced by the gentrification process are supposed to live in the event they are unable to afford the higher rents and mortgages that are an inevitable concomitant of the revitalization process. Although additional research, especially…