IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v116y2022ics0264837722000813.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beneath the appearance of state-led gentrification: The case of the Kwun Tong Town Centre redevelopment in Hong Kong

Author

Listed:
  • Tsang, Churn
  • Hsu, Lin-Fang

Abstract

The global reach of gentrification has been widely debated. Through a case study of the Kwun Tong Town Centre (KTTC) project, this research investigates whether redevelopment led by the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) in Hong Kong constitutes a form of state-led gentrification. Against the notion of generic gentrification, we argue that an urban process becomes gentrification only when the conceptual assumptions are consistent with contextual realities. Through a literature review, two core assumptions about state-led gentrification were identified: 1) the redevelopment is capital-led and against the community’s will, and 2) the logic of capital has overridden the logic of the government during the redevelopment. Despite the appearance of state-led gentrification, the KTTC redevelopment was a state-led while socially-oriented process supported by the local community. This project was undertaken to redress environmental deterioration and building obsolesce in a crowded and old urban area. Government-led planning was necessary because the project required government land, proactive planning, and public subsidies. Local support was conditioned on a societal consensus on the policy governing acquisition and compensation. The scheme design reflected a commitment to social goals and community aspiration. The URA endeavoured to address residents’ housing needs by directly engaging residents in the acquisition process. The authority leveraged private-sector capital to take forward redevelopment, but retained control over the project through a plan-led approach and a profit-sharing formula. The negative outcomes of displacement were mitigated by the authority and other contextual factors. The government’s ongoing commitment to public housing limited the chance of area-wide gentrification. Whilst not negating the problem of displacement, this article advocates for a grounded perspective to understand the cause and effect of a gentrification-like process. It further calls for research on similar projects to support the development of generalisable counter-gentrification agendas.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsang, Churn & Hsu, Lin-Fang, 2022. "Beneath the appearance of state-led gentrification: The case of the Kwun Tong Town Centre redevelopment in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000813
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722000813
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106054?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Ley & Sin Yih Teo, 2020. "Is Comparative Gentrification Possible? Sceptical Voices from Hong Kong," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 166-172, January.
    2. Loretta Lees & Hannah White, 2020. "The social cleansing of London council estates: everyday experiences of ‘accumulative dispossession’," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(10), pages 1701-1722, November.
    3. Matthias Bernt, 2016. "Very particular, or rather universal? Gentrification through the lenses of Ghertner and López-Morales," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 637-644, July.
    4. Yung, Esther H.K. & Sun, Yi, 2020. "Power relationships and coalitions in urban renewal and heritage conservation: The Nga Tsin Wai Village in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Jason Hackworth & Neil Smith, 2001. "The changing state of gentrification," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 92(4), pages 464-477, November.
    6. Wing-Shing Tang, 2017. "Beyond Gentrification: Hegemonic Redevelopment in Hong Kong," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 487-499, May.
    7. I Turok, 1992. "Property-Led Urban Regeneration: Panacea or Placebo?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 24(3), pages 361-379, March.
    8. Shin, Hyun Bang & Kim, Soo-Hyun, 2016. "The developmental state, speculative urbanisation and the politics of displacement in gentrifying Seoul," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60439, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. David Ley & Sin Yih Teo, 2014. "Gentrification in Hong Kong? Epistemology vs. Ontology," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1286-1303, July.
    10. Allen J. Scott, 2011. "Emerging cities of the third wave," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3-4), pages 289-321, August.
    11. Tai-Lok Lui, 2017. "Beneath the Appearance of Gentrification: Probing Local Complexities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 478-486, May.
    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. Carolyn Cartier, 2017. "Contextual Urban Theory and the ‘Appeal’ of Gentrification: Lost in Transposition?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 466-477, May.
    2. Hyun Bang Shin & Loretta Lees & Ernesto López-Morales, 2016. "Introduction: Locating gentrification in the Global East," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(3), pages 455-470, February.
    3. Cuz Potter & Danielle Labbé, 2021. "Gentrification or …? Injustice in large-scale residential projects in Hanoi," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(12), pages 2456-2472, September.
    4. Alan Smart & Josephine Smart, 2017. "Ain't Talkin' ‘Bout Gentrification: The Erasure of Alternative Idioms of Displacement Resulting from Anglo-American Academic Hegemony," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 518-525, May.
    5. Wing-Shing Tang, 2017. "Beyond Gentrification: Hegemonic Redevelopment in Hong Kong," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 487-499, May.
    6. Tai-Lok Lui, 2017. "Beneath the Appearance of Gentrification: Probing Local Complexities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 478-486, May.
    7. Emine Yetiskul & Sule Demirel, 2018. "Assembling gentrification in Istanbul: The Cihangir neighbourhood of BeyoÄŸlu," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(15), pages 3336-3352, November.
    8. Paul Waley, 2016. "Speaking gentrification in the languages of the Global East," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(3), pages 615-625, February.
    9. Hyun Bang Shin & Soo-Hyun Kim, 2016. "The developmental state, speculative urbanisation and the politics of displacement in gentrifying Seoul," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(3), pages 540-559, February.
    10. Qinran Yang & David Ley, 2019. "Residential relocation and the remaking of socialist workers through state-facilitated urban redevelopment in Chengdu, China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(12), pages 2480-2498, September.
    11. Dai Whan An & Jae-Young Lee, 2023. "Implications of Renovated Buildings in Yeonnam-Dong, Seoul, an Area under Commercial Gentrification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, January.
    12. Seon Young Lee, 2018. "Cities for profit: Profit-driven gentrification in Seoul, South Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(12), pages 2603-2617, September.
    13. Hae Yeon Choo, 2021. "Speculative homemaking: Women’s labour, class mobility and the affect of homeownership in South Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(1), pages 148-163, January.
    14. Ingmar Pastak & Anneli KÄHRIK, 2021. "SYMBOLIC DISPLACEMENT REVISITED: Place‐making Narratives in Gentrifying Neighbourhoods of Tallinn," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 814-834, September.
    15. N A Phelps, 1997. "A Hazard of New Fortunes: The Built Environment and Economic Development in Croydon," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 24(5), pages 643-645, October.
    16. Hila Zaban, 2020. "The real estate foothold in the Holy Land: Transnational gentrification in Jerusalem," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(15), pages 3116-3134, November.
    17. Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, 2016. "City-as-a-Platform: The Rise of Participatory Innovation Platforms in Finnish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-31, September.
    18. Winifred Curran, 2004. "Gentrification and the Nature of Work: Exploring the Links in Williamsburg, Brooklyn," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(7), pages 1243-1258, July.
    19. Manuel Fernández-García & Clemente J. Navarro & Irene Gómez-Ramirez, 2021. "Evaluating Territorial Targets of European Integrated Urban Policy. The URBAN and URBANA Initiatives in Spain (1994–2013)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    20. Ingmar Pastak & Eneli Kindsiko & Tiit Tammaru & Reinout Kleinhans & Maarten Van Ham, 2019. "Commercial Gentrification in Post‐Industrial Neighbourhoods: A Dynamic View From an Entrepreneur’s Perspective," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 110(5), pages 588-604, December.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000813. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.