Greening the gentrification process: Insights and engagements from practitioners
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Green gentrification implicates urban greening as a driver of neighbourhood ‘upgrading’ and subsequent displacement. However, it is unclear whether the concept resonates with, or supports the work of, those responsible for much of the greening occurring in cities – urban green planners/practitioners. We interviewed 33 planners/practitioners in Canada to refine our understanding of the relationships between urban greening and gentrification. We found that greening is closely tied to development, with funding/space for greening often provided through development requirements/incentives. Thus, rather than greening causing gentrification (as described in current literature), here greening is often a requirement and direct outcome of new development – contributing to what we describe as a broader greening of the gentrification process that is facilitated by various political-economic factors. Many interviewees stated that their current work focuses on addressing existing inequities rather than strategizing to limit future gentrification. However, they had mixed opinions about whether knowledge of green gentrification as a concept can help them promote equitable urban greening due to their lack of power over where/how urban greening occurs, along with the finding that greening is not causing gentrification. The uneven power dynamics between urban green practitioners/planners, developers, and elected officials also influenced views on whether gentrification is an intended outcome of greening. We conclude that relying on new development to provide urban greening is antithetical to addressing existing green inequities and is likely to exacerbate inequities through associating greening with gentrification. Recent measures to improve housing affordability (i.e. the removal of developer greening requirements) will disrupt the current development-greening relationship but are unlikely to address the issue of inequitable greening. Increased and ongoing collaboration between those working in urban greening, housing, and planning is paramount and should focus on affordability and equity across urban systems – attending to the interplay between greening, housing, affordability, and sustainability.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».