This publication is presented to you through Paradigm Publishing Services

Policy Press

Home Policy Press Five Gentrification without social mixing in the rapidly urbanising world of Australasia
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Five Gentrification without social mixing in the rapidly urbanising world of Australasia

Abstract

Social mix strategies in Australia are almost invariably associated with the large-scale regeneration of public housing estates. These redevelopment projects usually occur as public-private partnerships and are funded in part by the sale of new-build private housing at market rates. The first of such schemes to be implemented in Melbourne, Australia, involved the displacement of about 1,000 public tenants and will produce a 50:50 mix of public and private dwellings. The project is not yet complete and the effects of the strategy have not been evaluated. Yet this has not prevented the initiation of at least three more public housing estate redevelopments in Melbourne, all of which will involve displacement, demolition, new construction and selective relocation back to an area ‘regenerated’ through a reduction in public and increase in private housing stock. The chapter argues that notwithstanding the rhetoric of the benefits of social mix, the primary object of this approach is to create new opportunities for private sector investment in high-risk areas in as clear a case of third-wave, state-led gentrification as could be. This approach is contrasted with the rather lower profile, state-wide ‘neighbourhood renewal program’, which involves state and local government investment in services and infrastructure in 19 ‘disadvantaged communities’, including some other public housing estates. The programme has no discourse of social mix, no displacement, regular monitoring and evaluation, and, so far, apparent success and community acceptance.

Abstract

Social mix strategies in Australia are almost invariably associated with the large-scale regeneration of public housing estates. These redevelopment projects usually occur as public-private partnerships and are funded in part by the sale of new-build private housing at market rates. The first of such schemes to be implemented in Melbourne, Australia, involved the displacement of about 1,000 public tenants and will produce a 50:50 mix of public and private dwellings. The project is not yet complete and the effects of the strategy have not been evaluated. Yet this has not prevented the initiation of at least three more public housing estate redevelopments in Melbourne, all of which will involve displacement, demolition, new construction and selective relocation back to an area ‘regenerated’ through a reduction in public and increase in private housing stock. The chapter argues that notwithstanding the rhetoric of the benefits of social mix, the primary object of this approach is to create new opportunities for private sector investment in high-risk areas in as clear a case of third-wave, state-led gentrification as could be. This approach is contrasted with the rather lower profile, state-wide ‘neighbourhood renewal program’, which involves state and local government investment in services and infrastructure in 19 ‘disadvantaged communities’, including some other public housing estates. The programme has no discourse of social mix, no displacement, regular monitoring and evaluation, and, so far, apparent success and community acceptance.

Chapters in this book

  1. Front Matter i
  2. Contents iii
  3. List of tables, figures and photographs v
  4. Acknowledgements vii
  5. Notes on contributors viii
  6. Introduction: gentrification, social mix/ing and mixed communities 1
  7. Reflections on social mix policy
  8. Why do birds of a feather flock together? Social mix and social welfare: a quantitative appraisal 17
  9. Social mix and urban policy 25
  10. Mixed communities and urban policy: reflections from the UK 35
  11. Gentrification without social mixing in the rapidly urbanising world of Australasia 43
  12. Social mix in liberal and neoliberal times
  13. Social mixing and the historical geography of gentrification 53
  14. Social mix and encounter capacity – a pragmatic social model for a new downtown: the example of HafenCity Hamburg 69
  15. Social mix policies and gentrification
  16. Mixed-income schools and housing policy in Chicago: a critical examination of the gentrification/education/‘racial’ exclusion nexus 95
  17. Social mix as the aim of a controlled gentrification process: the example of the Goutte d’Or district in Paris 115
  18. Beware the Trojan horse: social mix constructions in Melbourne 133
  19. The rhetoric and reality of social mix policies
  20. Social mixing as a cure for negative neighbourhood effects: evidence-based policy or urban myth? 151
  21. Meanings, politics and realities of social mix and gentrification – a view from Brussels 169
  22. ‘Regeneration’ in interesting times: a story of privatisation and gentrification in a peripheral Scottish city 185
  23. HOPE VI: calling for modesty in its claims 209
  24. Experiencing social mix
  25. The impossibility of gentrification and social mixing 233
  26. Not the only power in town? Challenging binaries and bringing the working class into gentrification research 251
  27. From social mix to political marginalisation? The redevelopment of Toronto’s public housing and the dilution of tenant organisational power 273
  28. Mixture without mating: partial gentrification in the case of Rotterdam, the Netherlands 299
  29. Afterword 319
  30. References 323
  31. Index 365
Mixed Communities
This chapter is in the book Mixed Communities
Downloaded on 19.3.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.56687/9781847424952-008/html
Scroll to top button