IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pophec/v17y2018i4p378-397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gentrification and occupancy rights

Author

Listed:
  • Jakob Huber

    (Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

  • Fabio Wolkenstein

    (Aarhus University, Denmark)

Abstract

What, if anything, is problematic about gentrification? This article addresses this question from the perspective of normative political theory. We argue that gentrification is problematic insofar as it involves a violation of city-dwellers’ occupancy rights. We distinguish these rights from other forms of territorial rights and discuss the different implications of the argument for urban governance. If we agree on the ultimate importance of being able to pursue one’s located life plans, the argument goes, we must also agree on limiting the impact of gentrification on peoples’ lives. Limiting gentrification’s impact, however, does not entail halting processes of gentrification once and for all.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakob Huber & Fabio Wolkenstein, 2018. "Gentrification and occupancy rights," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 17(4), pages 378-397, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:17:y:2018:i:4:p:378-397
    DOI: 10.1177/1470594X18766818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X18766818
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1470594X18766818?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Miller, 2012. "Territorial Rights: Concept and Justification," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 60(2), pages 252-268, June.
    2. Miller, David, 2016. "Majorities and Minarets: Religious Freedom and Public Space," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 437-456, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Miller, 2019. "Lockeans versus nationalists on territorial rights," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 18(4), pages 323-335, November.
    2. Chris Armstrong, 2015. "Against ‘permanent sovereignty’ over natural resources," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 14(2), pages 129-151, May.
    3. Cara Nine, 2019. "Do territorial rights include the right to exclude?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 18(4), pages 307-322, November.
    4. Anna Stilz, 2017. "Settlement, expulsion, and return," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 351-374, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:17:y:2018:i:4:p:378-397. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.