impinzulza 2012 (us)

Latino Gentrification? Focusing onPhysical and Socioeconomic Patterns ofChange in Latin American Inner Cities

Jorge Inzulza-Contardo

[Paper first received, February 2010; in final form, May 2011]

Abstract

Although gentrification is an accepted process nowadays around the globe, littledebate is found in the Latin American contextparticularly, when considering that70 per cent of this continent is urbanised and that major physical and socioeco-nomic changes have been observed in its historical neighbourhoods in the past 20years. This paper focuses on the continuity and change that Santiago, Chile, hasshown in recent decades. Empirical data are provided to reflect both the physicaland socioeconomic patterns of change that have modified the urban morphologyand the social capital of Santiagos inner city. Furthermore, by selecting Bellavistaone of the oldest inner-city neighbourhoods of Santiagothis paper draws conclu-sions about how specific urban regeneration strategies can promote gentrificationand then links them with wider patterns of Latino gentrification.

Introduction

Diverse perspectives are reflected in the lit-erature with respect to the process of gen-trification. Since Glass (1964) coined theterm to describe the process observed in theearly changes in London in the 1960s, wheremiddle-class English people came back tooccupy inner neighbourhoods, displacingworking-class people living there (Smithand Williams, 1986; Zukin, 1988; Butler,1997; Hannigan, 1995; Sargatal, 2000;Smith, 1996; van Weesep, 1994), a large

number of authors have described this sub-ject, using different approaches focusing onthe economic, social and cultural impact.There is a consensus that, apart from thesocial change mentioned (from working-class to middle-class), gentrification is asso-ciated with a change of tenure, both fromrental to owner-occupancy and from multi-occupancy to single family.

Other concepts used to describe thesechanges of gentrification are Londonisation

Jorge Inzulza-Contardo is in the Departamento de Urbanismo, Universidad de Chile, Portugal 84,Pabellon A, Piso 2, Santiago, 3387, Chile. E-mail: [email protected].

49(10) 20852107, August 2012

0042-0980 Print/1360-063X Online 2011 Urban Studies Journal Limited

DOI: 10.1177/0042098011423425

by Dutton (2003) and super-gentrification(Lees, 2003) for Londons urban setting;revitalisation (Gans, 1982) and brown-stoning used in New York studies; and alsowhitepainting in Toronto (Pacione, 1990)as North American concepts. Likewise,Spanish terms such as aristocratizacion(Hardoy, 1992), reconquista urbana(Sargatal, 2000), or elitizacion (Garca,2001) have been used to explain the samephenomenon in Latin American andHispanic contexts.

However, the term gentrification hasnot been explored in depth in Latin Americaas it has been in the European, US and evenrecently in the Australian and South Africancontexts. This paper seeks to contribute tothe debate around gentrification in LatinAmerica and to uncover differences betweenthis continent, Europe and the US; particu-larly in historical neighbourhoods where itis possible to observe displacement of low-income classes and changes in housing type.The link between the physical and socioeco-nomic nature of this phenomenon in LatinAmerica naturally poses various questions.Are middle-class households (gentrifiers)displacing lower-income residents in innercities? And, what types of dwellings arelinked with these gentrifiers? By exploringthe urban governance experience in LatinAmerica, what has been the role of the statein this process of physical and social change?And, what other factors are involved in theLatino gentrification process?

Globalisation as a CommonLanguage for the LatinoGentrification Process

Clearly, industrialised countries show differ-ent physical and social structures, economiccapacity and demography in comparisonwith developing countries (Fajnzylber, 1990;Garca, 2000). It is well known that urban

development was first observed in the indus-trialised countries of Europe and NorthAmerica, extending quickly to developingcountries. Nevertheless, the effects were dif-ferent in the Latin American urban context,causing an unequal development and inter-nal differentiation of urban territories andsocieties (Panadero, 2001). The forms ofgentrification seen in recent decades varyfurther, the different effects depending onthe physical and social features of individualcities. In this sense, the singularities foundin the literature on the nature of European,US and Latin American inner cities mainlyobserved since 1990s are instructive. In fact,Ward provides a valuable comparisonamongst these continents to

demonstrate how urbanization and inner-

city development in Latin America, although

tied into processes which are global in terms

of their economic genesis and consumerist

inspiration, have produced rather different

outcomes from those observed in North

America and in the United Kingdom (Ward,

1993, p. 1155).

European cities have developed more com-pactly than North and South Americanneighbourhoods. Their character is distin-guished by a strong presence of pre-industrial architecture and symbolic valuesof their old quarters inherited from theMiddle Ages, the renaissance, the baroqueand classicism, which is clearly treasuredand conserved. Examples are the old quar-ters found in Islington, London and LeMarais in Paris, where most of the build-ings built in the 19th century have beenrestored from multiple occupancy to familyhousing, or converted into homes for newgentrifiers since the 1960s. On the otherhand, North and Latin American cities tendtowards increased verticality (the presenceof high-rise buildings) and more develop-ment of suburban development spaces than

2086 JORGE INZULZA-CONTARDO

in their European counterparts (White,1984; Yarwood, 1974). However, US citiesconserve old quarters from 19th Century asin the European context, but with a greaterpresence of old industrial buildings, whichhave been converted into home-studios(for example, the lofts in Soho, New York).

For the Latin American context, a mixedheritage of both European and US urbanconcepts is found in the inner-city areas.An eclectic European architecture contex-tualised in a post-Hispanic gridded urbanfabric using local materials for historicbuildings (such as adobe, wood and brick)is observed (Gilbert et al., 1982; Almandoz,2006). Some expressions of Latino gentrifi-cation are the influence of glass and steelbuildings used mainly by corporate compa-nies to generate a commercial recentralisa-tion. A population displacement occurredin the 1990s, identified as a modest gentri-fication by Ward (1993); and new housingprojectsgated communitieshave alsobeen incorporated into old quarters ofinner-city areas as part of this current pro-cess (Janoschka, 2002).

In this sense, Latin American historicareas have been more vulnerable thanEuropean inner cities to the effects of newhousing proposals or corporate buildingsthat replace existing residential properties.This situation, with an incipient label ofgentrification, was identified by Ford in hisimproved model about the urban fabric ofLatin American cities, pointing out that, inthe 1990s, cities

began to acknowledge their historic land-

scapes and to establish special protected dis-

tricts aimed at attracting tourists, artists

colonies, and local elites (Ford, 1996, p. 440).

Thus, historic neighbourhoods are seen astrendy areas to promote commercial andhousing projects, supplying the needs of anew Latin American middle class.

Hardoy (1992a, 1992b) and Gilbert et al.(1982) have written extensively about themain physical and social changes in theLatin American urban context, summaris-ing papers written by different authorswithin the period 197782 for countriessuch as Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina andEcuador. In those papers, common con-cepts are poverty, social inequality andpolitical and urban landscape change ininner cities. Favelas in Brazil, poblaciones inChile and tugurios in Colombia as marginaltowns allow an illustration of the hyper-urbanisation problems in Latin America,where urban development was dissociatedfrom industrial growth and the citysincreasing size was more an extension ofthe peripheral areas than a densification ofhistoric centres. In this sense, the returnof the middle class to Latin Americaninner-city areas, and the subsequent dis-placement of the working class, has beenless common when compared with theEuropean or US movements in the 1960sand 1970s. Thus, first- and second-wavegentrification seem to be more exclusiveto developed urban settings with particu-lar effects in the European, US, Canadianand Australian contexts.

Nevertheless, globalisation has been acommon language to define gentrificationfrom the 1980s onwards in the differentcontinents. In particular, Lungo and Bairesdescribe globalisation in Latin America notonly as an economic issue but also as a pro-cess, which involves

social, political and cultural dimensions that

modify substantially the territorial and occu-

pational grid, prevailing in the last decades of

the [20th Century] (Lungo and Baires, 2001,

p. 5).

Social segregation (Caldeira, 2000; Hardoy,1992b; Lungo and Baires, 2001; Portes,1989; Sabatini, 1997; Rodrguez and

LATINO GENTRIFICATION? 2087

Winchester, 2001) and urban poverty(Gilbert, 1992; Gilbert and Ward, 1985;MacDonald, 2003) have become the mainissues for many Latin American cities suchas Buenos Aires, San Salvador, Sao Pauloand Santiago. Gentrification seems to be adomino effect, where new patterns ofphysical and social expression are foundmainly since the 1980s and throughout the1990s in the Latin American context.Janoschka (2002) reinforces the idea thatthis substantial physical and social changeobserved in Latin American inner cities hasprovoked a rapid transformation of theurban landscape into a fragmented city,where different isles of consumption andproduction, of high-income bracket neigh-bourhoods (gated communities) and ofinformal sectors, can be identified.

Urban Lifestyle and New HousingTrends

In the past 50 years, access to urban land hasbeen one of the basic needs of the inhabi-tants of Latin America (MacDonald, 2003).Because of their electoral concerns andusing the slogan the dream of your ownhouse, Latin American governments havesupplied the cultural necessity of homeow-nership for the high-, medium- and low-income-classes seeking an improved socialstatus. Moreover, for low-income groups,homeownership is linked to the desire forsecurity that partially compensates for thesocial exclusion they experience in the per-ipheral areas (Lindon, 2005).

According to the urban morphology thatthe modernist period produced, housing inthe central areas should imply a lower com-muting cost than in the outskirts and a reduc-tion in negative effects such as lack of publictransport, urban infrastructure and insecur-ity. The local authorities in Santiago duringthe 1990s proposed actions for reversing the

decrease of population in the central area,based on a social study that indicated that

to house a new inhabitant in central Santiago

was 16 times more desirable (in terms of

social investment) than in the peripheral area

(Valenzuela, 2003, p. 57).

This initiative was formally carried outthrough an urban renewal subsidy (SRU,Chilean acronym) in 1992, which aimed tostimulate the interest of people to live ininner areas as a way to spend less money, tobe nearer to their jobs or simply to feel safer(and also to access their cultural heritage).

Thus, replacement of existing residents ofinner areas, promoted by national and localgovernments, has been observed, mainlysince the 1990s, through new housing marketactions and the promotion of an attractiveurban lifestyle to regenerate these areas (forexample, La Boca in Buenos Aires; see Herzeret al., 2008). However, at the same time, anurban lifestyle emulating Soho loft living hasbeen badly imitated in these neighbour-hoods, with new housing projects based onforeign models of consumption, far from theurban lifestyle of Latin American reality. Infact, the open space in living rooms of thenew housing projects called lofts is seen byoccupiers as a way to exhibit luxury furnitureand fashionable materials (marble, granite orplastic and wood) considered as being of ahigh standard, giving some signs of elitism tothe Latino middle class.

Therefore, Latin American society ischaracterised by an urban lifestyle, whichhas been changing mainly in the past 20years, especially with the globalisation pro-cess. Nowadays, its social structure isstrongly linked to the consumption of adifferent urban lifestyle represented by newhousing projects, which involves tearingdown heritage buildings and then modify-ing local identity patterns in the centralareas. This current situation of insistent


demand from Latino gentrifiers searchingfor an unconventional inner-city lifethrough housing (flats) located mainly inthe heights of the city is seen as a labora-tory of experiments. Approximately, 70per cent of Latin America is urbanised,with a large proportion of the populationliving in major metropolitan areas (Gilbert,1992), providing the perfect opportunity topromote the interests of local and transna-tional companies through new housingmarkets.

From the 1990s specifically, new housingareas in Latin America have been generatedparticularly through three kinds of privati-sation: planned decisions driven by politicaland/or economic issues; practical decisionsdriven by administrative agreements; and,unplanned decisions. This last modality hasbeen developed in large undertakingsthrough agreements between local govern-ments and tertiary sector companies. Thus,the urban context has suffered the conse-quences of those privatisations, especiallywith the public tenders of large housingprojects in valuable urban areas and theconcession of urban public services (Herzerand Passalacqua, 2003).

Gran Santiago: An Analysis ofUrban Changes

Since the 1960s, the metropolitan areaknown as Gran Santiago1 has undergonea major metamorphosis similar to that ofmany other Latin American cities; how-ever, the causes of its transformation aredistinct. Both physical and socioeconomicpatterns have been altered mainly due tothe impact of a major increase in housingprovision since the 1960s encouraged bytwo metropolitan masterplans and, later,in the 1980s, with two National UrbanDevelopment Policies, when market forcestook a main role in the urban planning of

the city. Even though these policies putconsiderable emphasis on the social devel-opment of the city under the name ofmarket social economy (in 1979), andestablished that urban land is a scarceresource (in 1985), a close examination ofthe development of Gran Santiago in thepast 30 years shows a clear liberalisation ofthe regulations for urban land density,which has led to a noticeable predomi-nance of residential property as a realphysical effect, with consequent effects onthe social fabric. Clearly, these patterns ofsocial and physical changes demonstratedin Santiago from the 1990s onwards can bealso linked with the Latino gentrificationsymptoms described previously (urbanlifestyle and new housing trends). Threekey indicators are selected for further anal-ysis to enrich the empirical debate in thenext sections.

The Tertiary Sector and EmploymentChange

The tertiary sector has increased due to glo-balisation, producing an important changein the profile of the employed population inthe period 19922002 for Gran Santiago. Anincrease of 311 113 people (from 729 867 to1 040 980) working as business managersand in academic and education leadership,and an additional 110 471 employers (anincrease from 210 381 to 320 852) in com-merce and the services activities groups arefound (de Mattos et al., 2005). Observingwhere these groups of employees are locatedin Gran Santiago, there are two groupswhich have experienced major changes:managerial professionals and general work-ers. Between 1992 and 2002, the first groupincreased by 4 per cent; in the same period,the second group decreased by 8 per cent,with a 12 per cent increase and 18 per centdecrease respectively for 2002 (see Figure 1).Likewise, both groups are concentrated in


opposing quadrants of Santiago. In 2002, anaverage of 27 per cent of managers and pro-fessional employees were concentrated inthe north-east quadrant of the city.

Meanwhile, employees categorised asworkers are spread evenly across the south-east, south-west and north-west quadrants.Santiagos centre district (district 1, in Figure1) demonstrates similar proportions for boththese kinds of employees, with 15 per cent forthe leadership group and 11 per cent forworkers in 2002. Moreover, it is possible toobserve a clear territorial difference for the

location of managerial professionals andworker groups for the whole Gran Santiagoterritory, with managerial professionals con-centrated in eastern Gran Santiago and work-ers concentrated on the western side. Further,the north-east quadrant shows a predomi-nance of managers and professionals, who areassociated with higher and middle incomes.In this sense, Recoleta, (district 8, in Figure 1)located in the middle of the north-east andnorth-west quadrants, can be highlighted asan example of the opposite situation, withonly 4 per cent of managers and professionals

0 2 4 6 km

Managerial professionals Workers

0 to 56 to 10

11 to 1516 to 2526 to 34

Cer

rillo

s

Puda

huel

Northwest

Southwest

Northeast

Southeast

Northwest

Southwest

Northeast

Southeast

16

3

2

74

5

8

74

3

21

8

6

5

Bellavista neighbourhood

Figure 1. Percentages of managerial professionals and general workers in Gran Santiago dis-tricts, 2002.Key: 1. Santiago centre. North-east quadrant districts: 2. La Reina; 3. Las Condes; 4. Lo Barnechea;5. Nunoa; 6. Providencia; 7. Vitacura. North-west quadrant: 8. Recoleta.Sources: approximated from Census of Population 2002; de Mattos et al. (2005).


resident there and only 25 per cent of workers(associated with lower incomes).

Moreover, Recoleta and Providencia(districts 8 and 6, in Figure 1) illustrate astriking difference: Recoleta has the lowestpercentage (05 per cent) and Providenciathe highest (2634 per cent) of people onhigher incomes. Curiously, these districtsare largely separated by a significant naturalboundary: the San Cristobal hill, with theneighbourhood of Bellavista (which formspart of Santiagos historic centre) as theonly connection between them. In thissense, Bellavista as the particular neigh-bourhood boundary is a clear object ofgentrification within Gran Santiagos urbansetting, where tensions between differentsocioeconomic groups can be associatedwith replacement (rather than displace-ment) of existing low-income residents.

Demographic and Income Changes

A main demographic change that GranSantiago has experienced in the past 30 yearsis the contrast between the increasing popu-lation in the outer area versus a decrease inthe inner city. Santiagos historic centre with5 408 142 inhabitants (13.6 per cent lessthan in 1992) and other inner districts suchas Quinta Normal (24 077) and Recoleta(16 072) have experienced a reduction inpopulation during the period 19922002.Furthermore, the composition of the popu-lation has changed during the same periodin these districts. The core of Santiago andits north-east area increased in terms of thepercentage of economically active people inthe 1959-year-old group. Likewise, thosesectors present the lowest proportion ofunder 18-years-olds, but a higher propor-tion of retired people.

In terms of income, Gran Santiago showsimportant territorial differences between theincomes received per household. There is aclear predominance of higher family incomes

(1 600 0012 500 000 Chilean pesos, CHpper month) in the north-east quadrant inmunicipalities such as Providencia, LasCondes and Lo Barnechea. The major surveyconducted by the Ministry of Planning in2000 (CASEN), showed that the averagemonthly household income is between500 001 and 700 000 CHp (INE, 1999;MIDEPLAN, 2000) for the Santiago district.Although this result is similar to the ones inother eastern districts (Macul and Penalolen)that contain some of the high-income eliteand the middle class (Sabatini, 1997), in realterms Santiagos centre shows important ter-ritorial disparities that are closer to the dis-tricts with the two lower ranges of householdincomes (250 000400 000 and 400 000500 000 CHp monthly).

Thus, an unequal urban image can beobserved in the western neighbourhoods incomparison with the eastern neighbour-hoods. For the former area, a great numberof working-class residents were located his-torically in the south-west of Santiago his-toric centre coinciding with the first yearsof the Chilean Republic, when the firstmapuches (native people) arrived inSantiago and were relegated by theSpaniards to live in that zone, forming thecitys shape (de Ramon, 2001). By contrast,the eastern neighbourhood area has beenmost attractive to upper- and middle-classSantiaguinos.

Housing Market Transformation

Great activity in the housing sector has beenobserved in the past 30 years with benefitsmainly to private-sector development, ratherthan social housing provision by the state(Arenas, 2006). For the Gran Santiago areafrom 1992, household tenure has maintainedsimilar proportions, where 67.91 per cent ofhouseholds are private owner-occupiers and13.07 per cent are private rented householdsin 2002 (see Table 1). In absolute terms, this


means 998 063 owner-occupied and 193 654private rented households (there were in1 489 645 households in Gran Santiago in2002). Santiago central district represents adifferent situation of household tenure incomparison with the north-west, south-eastand south-west quadrants.

The other category made up about 47per cent of households in 2002.2 This can beexplained by the fact that, in this sector,mixed land uses such as commerce, industryand public institutions are competing withprivate housing land use. Therefore, otherkinds of household tenure have beenadopted, including families in which themain householder is employed in public ser-vices. A similar situation is observed inSantiago centre and in the north-east quad-rant, these having 6.73 per cent and 5.04 percent respectively of private rented house-holds, adding 221 582 households to GranSantiagos urban fabric. For example,

Recoleta district, in the north-west quad-rant, increased its total of private rentedcategory to 36 706 households between 1992and 2002 (0.68 percentage points). For thesouthern quadrants, the percentage of pri-vate rented households is more than twicethat of the north-east quadrant, reachingalmost 19 per cent on average (south-eastwith 19.63 per cent + south-west with18.08 per cent) and surpassing the GranSantiago average in 2002 (13.07 per cent).

By analysing the types of dwelling, twomain groups of housing can be summarised:houses and flats. For the first group, ter-raced, semi-detached and detached housesare included, one to three storeys, located onindividual urban sites or as part of a commonsite, normally called a condominium. Thesecond group (flats) corresponds to housinglocated in either middle- or high-rise build-ings, which may be part of a condominium.For the period 19922002, disparities are

Table 1. Household tenure, Gran Santiago, 19922002 (percentages)

Districts/quadrant

Households

Owner-occupied Private rented Other

1992 2002 1992 2002 1992 2002

North-east quadrantLa Reina 71.81 71.95 5.83 7.82 21.00 20.23Las Condes 66.34 65.59 6.19 3.18 24.23 31.23Lo Barnechea 68.54 76.20 17.59 8.57 10.11 15.19Nunoa 67.71 64.03 3.67 3.82 26.35 32.13Providencia 57.43 53.65 5.41 4.61 32.17 41.71Vitacura 70.18 68.73 3.82 2.25 23.82 29.01

Total 67.00 66.71 7.13 5.04 23.94 28.25

Recoleta 68.79 68.73 8.48 9.16 21.12 22.08

North-west 73.01 73.30 11.47 10.82 15.05 14.82South-east 73.28 73.80 18.18 19.63 7.07 6.55South-west 73.85 74.21 16.40 18.08 8.33 7.68Santiago Centre 45.28 46.53 7.49 6.73 42.78 46.71

Gran Santiago total average 67.48 67.91 12.13 13.07 19.46 19.80

Sources: Census of Housing, 1992 and 2002.


found between the north-east quadrant andSantiago centre and the rest of the GranSantiago built-up area. According to theCensuses of Housing in 1992 and 2002, aremarkable increase of 53 591 flats or 75 percent is recorded during this period in thenorth-east quadrant (from 71 407 to 124 998units), placing the north-east at the top of thelist for number of flats and also representingalmost 40 per cent of the total number of flatsin Gran Santiago in 2002. For Santiagocentre, the situation is similar, with 38 661flats in 2002, representing an increase of 70.3per cent for this type of dwelling in this dis-trict. Furthermore, this central area is theonly sector of Gran Santiago where thenumber of houses decreased (4364 unitsfewer in 2002 from 1992).

The effects that these dwelling types havehad on the Gran Santiago skyline in recentdecades require analysis, linking these effectsto the new urban lifestyle patterns. ForSantiago centre, the current set of properties

on offer shows 50 new high-rise buildingsbeing offered for residential use with threemain options: studio flats, one-bedroomflats and two-bedroom flats with one or twobathrooms (some flats offer three bedroomsin the same overall built area). The pricerange expressed in Unidades de Fomento(UF)3 is between 530 UF (12 304 approxi-mately) and 1450 UF (33 662 approxi-mately) and the floor area is usually between30 square metres and 70 square metres,depending on the interior design and thenumber of rooms proposed.4 An importantaspect of these new housing projects is thevariety of architectural proposals that havebeen developed in recent decades. Buildingsthat emulate American and European stylessuch as lofts, Victorian facxades andSilicone Valley expressions are redefiningSantiagos skyline. In addition, a clear directrelationship between the most extensiveproperty development activities and landvalues can be found (see Table 2).

Table 2. Property development in Gran Santiago, 2001 (fourth quarter)

Quadrants/boroughs

Total offered built area UF/square metre

Unit Square metres UF Average Minimum Maximum

North-eastLa Reina 33 194 893 968 618 4.97 3.00 11.49Las Condes 89 223 348 3 872 854 17.34 1.24 70.00Lo Barnechea 51 121 609 755 192 6.21 1.50 24.00Nunoa 28 41 520 511 111 12.31 4.30 30.00Providencia 40 61 596 1 214 057 19.71 10.00 32.00Vitacura 36 122 146 1 695 386 13.88 1.90 35.00

Total 277 765 122 9 017 218 12.40 3.65 33.74

Recoleta 18 30 874 185 244 6.00 2.76 25.00North-west 68 453 622 1 436 808 4.23 1.83 11.71South-east 116 483 676 2 157 017 4.71 2.18 9.11South-west 67 283 517 1 124 222 4.17 2.11 12.80Santiago centre 47 69 726 737 004 10.57 3.24 19.00

Gran Santiago 575 2 055 663 14 472 269 7.21

Sources: CCHC (2003); SEREX (2002).


Santiago centre and the four districtsthat belong to the north-east quadrant(Vitacura, Las Condes, Providencia andNunoa) have the highest land values, at anaverage of almost 15 UF per square metre.In this sense, the north-east quadrant con-tains more than one-third (37.2 per centor 765 122 square metres) of all propertydevelopment in Gran Santiago (2 055 663square metres) with 765 122 squaremetres. Likewise, in 2001, the municipalityof Santiago centre registered an invest-ment by the private sector of 737 004 UFin property development. This is compara-ble with the south-west quadrants invest-ment of 1 124 222 UF, although thecentral area has less than a quarter of thesouth-west quadrants built-up area(69 726 versus 283 517 square metres).Thus, territorial disparities found in GranSantiagos urban fabric are encouraged bycurrent property development activities,which have reinforced the tendency fromthe past 30 years onwards. These housingmarket tendencies are promoting strongterritorial differences between the easternand western areas of the city. At the sametime, this dynamic process is accentuatingtensions generated between local commu-nities who suffer disadvantages due to theincrease in the price of homes, and thelocal governments which lack adequateurban regulations and protection measuresfor the residents (Arriagada and Simioni,2001).

In short, changes in the patterns of resi-dent profile and housing demand tendenciesare summarised for the past 20 years; thesehave affected much of the original identityand local life that inner Gran Santiago usedto have, especially in the old quarters. Thegeography of gentrification based on recenttrends in Gran Santiagosuch as new gatedcommunity projects located in both the innerand outer citycould make it more difficultto move towards more positive changes,

given that market forces seem to be the maindrivers of urban development in the city.

Bellavista Neighbourhood: The TwoFaces of the Coin

The neighbourhood of Bellavista forms partof the core of Santiago, with a strategic loca-tion in the north-east quadrant and with astrong urban image that is firmly incorpo-rated in the collective memory of eachSantiaguino. This historic quarter dates backto the beginning of Santiagos foundationwhen it initially formed its west side as theLa Chimba quarter, making it one of thefirst suburban areas in 16th-century Chile(Winchester et al., 2001). Subsequently, atthe end of the 19th-century, it comprisedpart of the Leon XIII quarter (one of the firstCatholic working-class neighbourhoodsestablished in Gran Santiago) (Hidalgo andCaceres, 2003). Nowadays, Bellavista isdivided between two municipalities:Providencia and Recoleta (see Figure 2).

However, much water has passed underthe bridge since its formation and Bellavistahas seen many physical and socioeconomicchanges, especially in the past 20 years.Modern urban life and international influ-ence from the US economic model, foreignconsumption and globalisation havestrongly modified Bellavistas neighbour-hood identity. In this sense, Bellavista rep-resents a typical case of physical and socialchange that most historic Latin Americanneighbourhoods are experiencing nowa-days. In consequence, conservation andrecent effects of gentrification seem to beinfluencing this historic area.

The New Residents of Bellavista:White or Light-blue Collars?

The current social composition of theBellavista neighbourhood can be summarised


using both quantitative and qualitative data.Table 3 provides statistical estimations ofpopulation for residents in 2004, which wasundertaken alongside the residential profilesof Bellavista, including family composition,employment, housing type and tenure, andeducational level as key urban indicators.This table has been compiled using methodsof data collection from both official statisticsand fieldwork undertaken in Santiago, Chileduring December 2006 to August 2007. Datafrom the Census of Population and Housing(1992 and 2002) and 60 semi-structuredinterviews carried out with residents ofBellavista have been combined in an attemptto capture, as accurately as possible, the resi-dent profile. Specifically, the semi-structured

interview schedule was applied in the periodDecember 2006 to January 2007 and con-ducted with the two main categories of resi-dent of Bellavista defined in this research:long-standing residents nicknamed old resi-dents, who have been living there for at least20 years (and in many cases for more than 40years); and new residents who have recentlymoved to the area (mainly since 2000). Thissub-division had the aim of exploring the dif-ferent perceptions and values that both oldand new residents have concerning the urbanareas closest to them. Of the total inter-viewed, the majority (36) are old residentsand the rest (24) are new residents. Bydescribing the district that they represented,a slight difference is revealed: 29 Recoleta

Main public &private green spaces:

San Cristbal hill 1Juan Pablo II park 2 Caupolican square 3

Camilo Mori square 4Los Molinos square 5

TV Chanels and square 6San Cristbal sport centre 7

Tennis club centre 8Montecarmelo cultural centre 9Inmaculada secondary school 10

Murialdo secondary school 11

2

19

5

6

11

4

10

8

7

N

Recoletadistrict

Providencia district

3

6

0 0.05 0.1 km

Park (metropolitan including zoo /and local squares (courtyards)Predominance of front-garden facades /cultural centre and secondary school yards Natural boundary (Mapocho river)Street boundaries (Loreto and Po Nono)

Figure 2. The Bellavista neighbourhood.


residents and 31 residents of Providenciawere selected.5

The design of this interview included 49questions, in two sections: the first part with20 questions including specific hard data (dateof birth, length of residence, housing tenure,

place of work, etc.) and the second part with29 questions that included more open-endedquestions about the perception and values ofresidents. A friendly environment was a cru-cial condition to conduct the interviews. Infact, only two people were interviewed outside

Table 3. Old and new residents in Bellavista samples 2004

ProfileOld residents(resident 20 years or over)

New residents(resident since 2000)

Resident profile family compositionNumber of residents Estimated on 1276 residents

521 residents (66 years orolder)755 residents (4665 years)

Estimated on 1620 residents904 residents (3145 yearsmainly)716 residents (from flats,estimated 2 people x 358 flats)

Family composition 25 people per household(married couple with children,or sons and daughters)1 person per household(single, widow)

13 people per household(young couples with orwithout children)1 person per household(single, woman householder)

Housing type and tenureBuilding typology Type A: terraced building

Type B: garden-city buildingType C: mainly CiteRange 60400 square metresbuilt area

Type A: terraced buildingType B: garden-city buildingRange 60400 square metresbuilt areaType C: mainly gatedcommunities with middle- andhigh-rise building range 3580square metres built area (flat)

Housing tenure TenantsMainly owner-occupied(without debt like mortgage)

Tenants (possibly finance lease)Both owner-occupied (withand without mortgage)

Education and employmentEducation Higher education (professional

degree, technical, artist,painter, writer, etc.)Lower education from 2ndand 3rd sector (technical,worker)

Mainly higher education from3rd sector (professionaldegree, postgraduate, manager,technical, graphic design,press, some workers, etc.)

Employment Paid employeesSelf-employedSome managersUnemployedHouse-keeping

Paid employeesSelf-employedSome managersUnemployed

Sources: based on: Resident profile from 60 semi-structured interviews for Bellavista residents;Municipalidad de Recoleta (2005); Census of Population and Housing, 2002; Census ofPopulation 2002; Inzulza, 2011.


their houses (particularly in Camilo Morisquare). The rest of the people agreed to beinterviewed in their houses, which was helpfulas a way of examining the nature of the housesin terms of size and some features associatedwith specific kinds of resident (pioneer resi-dents, new graphic artists, white-collars work-ers, etc.).

The long-standing residents group isestimated to include 1276 people, with dif-ferent backgrounds (artisans, painters,sculptors, architects, etc.); but also peoplewho have completed only their primaryeducation (workers, vendors, etc.). Thisgroup (long-standing residents) is identifiedacross the whole Bellavista territory asowner-occupiers of one- to three-storey ter-raced houses dating from the end of 19thcentury to the mid 20th century, mainlyidentified as type A terraced building, ofthe period 18901930, with a constructedarea of 60400 square metres and additionaloutdoor terrain (see Figure 3.A). The inter-viewed long-standing residents average ageis over 30, which means that most of themhave been established in this neighbour-hood since the 19601970s. The mainreason for selecting Bellavista as their homequarter was that it was an affordable option,which allowed them to live in the core ofthe city, with access to cultural activities(theatres, galleries, schools of art, etc.).Others also saw the surrounding naturalenvironment (hill and river) as importantin making locational choices. Moreover,long-standing residents have good mem-ories about neighbourhood life and a stronglocal identity as Bellavistinos.

The second group, or new residents, ischaracterised by a profile of 3145-year-oldtenant and/or owner-occupier with mort-gage, from a middle-class family (rather thanfrom a high-income family); with a goodeducational background (university degreeand, in some cases, postgraduate studies) butworking as paid employees (rather than as

managers) and being employed mainly in thetertiary sector (marketing, computing, gra-phic design, architectural drawing, etc.). It isestimated that at least 1620 new residents(12.6 per cent more than long-standing resi-dents) have settled in western Bellavista(Recoleta district) since 2002.6 By connectingthe physical findings about housing type,new residents are particularly associatedwith the first three building types: type A ter-raced building, already described; type Bgarden-city (196080), characterised bydetached and/or semi-detached one- tothree-storey buildings, with a built area in therange of 60300 square metres and located ina plot with front garden and courtyard (seeFigure 3B.). Finally, for the type C gatedcommunities, three sub-categories are iden-tified: C.1 the Cite category with one- tothree-storey terraced buildings, which wasbuilt before 1900 and with a constructed areaof 60100 square metres. This sub-categoryC1, together with the previous types A and Balready described, can be defined as houses.The other two sub-categories of type C gatedcommunities are similar and compriseflats, dating mainly from 1980 until thepresent and located in middle-rise buildings(three to seven storeys) as sub-category C.2,or high-rise buildings (15 to 22 storeys) assub-category C.3. This last category formedby high-rise buildings is described in moredetail in the next subsection (as shown inTable 4 and Figure 4).

Similarly, residents from the long-standing category can also to be found, inparticular, in middle-rise buildings of typeC. Types A and B housing refer mainly toolder one- to three-storey terraced and/ordetached buildings with a constructed areaof up to 400 square metres, that can beused for both living (home) and working(studio-home). Nevertheless, new lifestylepatterns are associated with new residentsliving in the type C high-rise buildings.Although most new residents have been


identified as rental tenants or even owner-occupiers paying a mortgage, it does notnecessarily mean that new residents want tosettle in Bellavista permanently. From theinterviewed group of new residents livingin high-rise buildings, the choice to live inBellavista depended ultimately on their jobconditions. For example, three of theyoung couples interviewed noted that theydecided to live in Bellavista primarilybecause this quarter is located near to theirjobs (Santiagos historic centre). However,they were aware that the option of living inBellavista could change if they left theircurrent jobs, or if they wanted to move toouter Santiago to a house or larger prop-erty than their current 50 square metresflats.

As the tertiary sector has grown in recentdecades, with good job opportunities fromcompanies established in the Santiagocentre district (revised previously), this sit-uation helps the housing market to stimu-late new projects for people who choose tolive in the historic neighbourhoods locatedbeside Santiagos main business area.Hence, the selection criterion of choosingBellavista for its cultural activities could be

a second priority for new residents whomight only be there temporarily (for a fewyears or even less).

In short, an urban scenario with a pri-macy of paid-employee young-professionals(rather than managers) who are tenants(rather than owners) is the social panoramaseen in Bellavista (19922002). Furthermore,this situation has been generating rapidsocial change in inner Santiago duringrecent decades, which appears dependent onhow sustainable the tertiary sector is.Undoubtedly, this approach is a riskyoption for the existence and consolidationof historic neighbourhoods, as in Bellavistascase. The new residents, as analysed, do notcoincide necessarily with the white-collarprofile (manager category or a high-incomeclass) as the purest gentrification concept. Inthis sense, they can be categorised as light-blue-collar workers according to their socialprofile, with a need for a better urban life-style and mainly located in flats. In any case,the group of new residents can be consid-ered as potential gentrifiers as they are caus-ing the displacement of old residents andincreasing both land value and the cost ofliving in Bellavista.

Figure 3. A: an example of terraced building; B: a garden-city street.Source: authors photographs.


Urban Policies Initiatives:Encouraging a HigherGentrification?

The recent patterns of change in the physi-cal morphology of Bellavista can beexplained, in part, by the national urbanincentive already mentioned, the urbanrenewal subsidy (SRU), in force since 1992for only half of the Bellavista neighbour-hood (Recoleta district). This SRU pro-moted the buying and/or the constructionof social housing, which can have a con-structed area of 140 square metres (maxi-mum) and a price of 2000 UF (46 193approximately). According to the DFL2law, which regulates this social housingsubsidy, it can consist of new or renovatedhousing. However, form and content prob-lems during the implementation of theSRU have been detected, with analysisshowing that this is particularly the case inBellavista: Bellavista has used this incentiveand, clearly, these areas (eastern and west-ern Bellavista) reveal different physical andsocial patterns of development. Relevantfigures can be found by means of the analy-sis of statistics recently published by theMinistry of Housing and Urban Planningabout the main synopsis of SRU. This keystudy, an evaluation of the SRU for innerSantiago in the period 19912005, shows agreat number of flats (42 962) sold withSRU specifically for the period 19952005.Of these flats, 76.5 per cent are located intothe Santiago historic area district with32 871 units (see Table 4).

The rest of the flats are located in threemain districts; San Miguel, Quinta Normaland Recoleta, with 2799, 2176 and 2128 flatsrespectively. By looking at the Recoleta dis-trict, a progressive increment of flats may beobserved, mainly from the 200205 period.In addition, western Bellavista has a consid-erable number of flats (865 units) builtsince 2001, even though this area does notshow any building activity in 2002. Thisfigure is more relevant when it is consideredthat this area of Bellavista has almost half ofthe flats that have been sold in the Recoletadistrict (1777 units) for the period 200105.Arriagada et al. (2007) point out that, sincethis kind of housing began to be a main ten-dency in inner Santiago, a rise in land pricesand an improvement in housing standardshave been observed. In terms of housingtypes, these flats have an average size of 63square metres and are located mainly indense high-rise buildings equipped withunderground car-parking areas, foyers inthe main entrance, 24-hour security, acces-sibility and administration services of a highstandard. Moreover, these high-rise build-ings have incorporated interior design withsophisticated luxury materials similar tothose found in the high-income housingmarket. In terms of the physical fabric, theSRU is not really creating a positive homo-geneous image of the city. Conversely, fromthe western Bellavista sample, it is possibleto see that high-rise buildings with concreteand glass frontages are being systematicallylocated in this area (see Figure 4). Thus,

Table 4. Number of flats sold with SRU in inner Santiago, 19952005

Area 199599 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

Inner Santiago 13 815 1 673 18 13 2 799 4 780 7 314 10 768 42 962Recoleta district 173 178 95 165 215 600 702 2 128Bellavista neighbourhood n/i n/i 72 115 678 865

Sources: based on Arriagada et al. (2007, p. 33); Municipalidad de Recoleta (2005).


physical manifestations of recent waves ofgentrification can be observed by the greatamount of housing that these high-risebuildings are drawing into the new Santiagoinner skyline.

As mentioned before, the new housingconsumers are not necessarily in the high-income bracket; neither are they recoveringtheir old properties as observed in 1960sinner London or 1970s Soho, New York.Nevertheless, spots with a different socialcomposition can be observed in most of thehistoric neighbourhoods, as in Bellavista,accompanied by an increase in values ofurban land and new patterns of consump-tion by new residents. Arriagada et al. (2007)recognise that, although the gentrificationprocess as observed in the US or Canadiancontexts has not been part of the innerSantiago landscape that the Chilean housingmarket is using in advertising campaigns,the same lofts and home studio units andluxury facilities (swimming-pool on the top,central heating system) are being employed

to attract the attention of the potentialinner-city residents. The 793 flats that havebeen located in western Bellavista between2003 and 2005 mean that, at least 1886 newresidents have moved to the area, assumingtwo people per flat. This compares with theexisting 1819 residents who settled in thisarea in 2002.

Therefore, pressures of change can clearlybe inferred from the application of SRUapplied in Bellavista/Recoleta. In this sense,the dynamic housing market observed since2000 in this historic area allows a link withthe theoretical debate of this paper aboutrecent waves of gentrification. The rapidincrease in flats, at an average of 264 unitsper year for the period 200305, and theglobal patterns of this housing type repre-sented by high-rise buildings as shown inFigure 4, can also be observed in many LatinAmerican inner cities. This means that prob-ably most of the genuine urban fabric ofwestern Bellavista, as observed in other his-toric neighbourhoods, will be replaced in

Figure 4. A high-rise building located in western Bellavista. Source: authors photograph.


the short- or medium-term period by a newphysical expression of the housing market,using globalisation as a common languagefor the Latino gentrification process.

Conclusion: Displacement orReplacement?

From analysis concerning the four waves ofgentrification described from the 1960s tothe present-day by Lees et al. (2008), it canbe argued that the first and second waves ofthis phenomenon are largely absent in theLatin American context, but that the thirdand even fourth waves of gentrification canbe clearly observed from the 1980s/1990s.Thus, the metamorphosis that is gentrifica-tion taking place across the world can alsobe observed in the Latin American context,but with some local differences which helpto propose the Latino gentrification con-cept as the main contribution of this paper.Latino gentrification is defined as thereplacement of the existing residentialtypology (one-, two- or three-storey ter-raced houses) by a new housing tendency(middle- and high-rise buildings), ratherthan the displacement of people of lowincome to the outskirts by people of higherincome, or the return to the central areas ofa middle class seeking to develop its artisticor cultural activities.

Explicitly, by focusing on the core ofLatin American cities, four key issues thatare changing the physical and social patternscan be described. First, an urban povertyand social exclusion segregating this coreare observed (Sabatini, 1997; Portes, 1989;Rodrguez and Winchester, 2001 and 2004).Secondly, as the main physical and socialexpression of this segregation, new types ofhousing, such as gated communities con-sisting mainly of high-rise buildings, arebeing sold by developers encouraged bynational and local government agendas

(Coy and Pohler, 2002; Rojas et al., 2004;Borsdorf et al., 2007). Thirdly, as potentialurban consumers of these new housingexpressions, Latino gentrifierstypified bypeople connected with tertiary-sector jobsand new middlelow incomes (or light-blue collars)are selecting historic neigh-bourhoods to establish both an urban life-style and a new trend in housing (Hardoyand Gutman, 1992; Arizaga, 2003). Finally,this tendency of use is strongly linked toincreased consumption encouraged by glo-balised commodities, and conflict between apre-existing community and newcomerswho may lack any local identity (Jones andWard, 2004). In this sense, the historicneighbourhoods in Latin America seem tobe the best commodities for public- andprivate-sector interests in search of a signifi-cant investment.

From the analysis of Gran Santiago, anenormous territorial disparity can be observedin the built-up area in the past 30 years. As aresult, four comparable portions (or quad-rants) with different physical conditions andsocial development can be identified. Peoplein the high-income bracket are mainly in thenorth-east quadrant; people of low incomeare in the south-west quadrant; there is a mixof people of middle and low income in thenorth-west quadrant; and people of middle tohigh income are located in the south-eastquadrant. Thus, modern-day Santiago can bedescribed as a city searching for its identitybeyond its own reality, overflowing its ruralhistory and especially inspired by foreigndevelopment such as the US suburban style.In the geographical centre, Santiagos historicarea itself is being transformed into aneccentric urban showcase for administrative,business and trendy housing markets: high-rise buildings emulating retroarchitecture intheir facxades; housing and office projects shar-ing the same surrounding areas as historicheritage buildingsand, quite often, withsimilar names to the historic monuments


and typical zones. Ortz and Morales (2002)have identified specific socioeconomic groupsof new Santiaguino residents who havechosen to live in some areas of the historiccentre. For instance, 40 per cent of youngpeople who have migrated from the outskirtsto the core of the city are middle class andqualified professionals who have been settledin the east of the Santiago historic centre, spe-cifically the Lira, Santa Luca, San Franciscoand Lastarria quarters. In this latter quarter,groups of people are buying or renting old200300 square metres flats located in frontof the Parque Forestal, overlooking theMapocho river, and with privileged access tocultural activities located in the historic sur-rounding areas.

This reality is being emulated but withsome differences (especially in the social pro-file) for new residents of the Bellavista neigh-bourhood located near to these old quarters.Rehabilitation versus redevelopment actionsare further reinforcing the political-administrative boundaries in force inBellavista since 1982. A different Bellavistaskyline can be observed nowadays, shapedby high-rise buildings mainly located on itswestern side (Recoleta district) with the SanCristobal hill as a natural backdrop, whichused to be the main landmark for anySantiaguino. Even though Bellavista hasdecreased in population in the past 20 years(21.5 per cent) as part of the depopulationobserved in inner Santiago, an increasingredistribution of the population of youngprofessionals can be observed in this historicarea for the same period. Consequently, thissituation helps to reinforce the fact that thedisplacement of the working class by higherclasses returning to the core of Santiago hasnot been observed in this context, as a keyfeature of the first and second waves of gen-trification. However, the apparent non-displacement of low-income people does notmean that gentrification is not occurring,but rather that the physical and social

conversion is underway as contemporarywaves of this process.

Thus, gentrification here seems to bemore associated with a major social changebeginning in the 1990s produced by anactive housing markets replacement ofterraced houses, and resulting in the dis-placement of existing residents. In addi-tion, this replacement has been for bothresidential and commercial land uses. Forinstance, in Bellavista, since 2002 only athird of its built-up area has been used forresidential developments (29.05 per cent),compared with 33.15 per cent for commer-cial and offices land uses (20.75 per centand 12.4 per cent respectively). This situa-tion is more critical when looking at thewestern side of this historic quarter (theRecoleta district) where the percentage ofcommercial and office uses has risen to 38per cent. Only one-quarter of the westernBellavista area (26.6 per cent) was regis-tered for residential use in 2002. The restof the area (35.5 per cent) corresponds toother uses such as industry, education andurban services.

The disparity between commercial, resi-dential use and offices affects mainly theoriginal terraced-type houses but also thehistoric public realm of this western area.Apparently, around 70 per cent of the origi-nal Bellavista/Recoleta area urban fabric wascomprised of terraced houses and thatmeans that at least one-quarter or more ofthis original housing area has been con-verted to commercial activities. In fact, aconversion of these properties into discothe-ques, clubs and small factories can be affect-ing the architecture of western Bellavista.These patterns of change described forBellavista are closely comparable with otherexamples of Latin American historic neigh-bourhoods with similar significant land usechanges. La Boca quarter in Buenos Airesand La Candelaria in Bogota are both exam-ples of how most of the existing residential


land uses have changed into commercialand offices land uses (Carrion, 2005), as apart of Latino gentrification.

Amongst physical changes, the locationof high-rise buildings seems to representthe most aggressive pattern of gentrifica-tion. This building type, which in mostcases has been expressed through gatedcommunities, gives a different image ofgentrification when compared with the firstand second waves in the US and Europeancontexts. Instead of old Victorian houses orformer industrial properties being con-verted into lofts, Latino gentrificationseems to be rising to the heights of thecity. Many residents see this physicalchange as the most invasive action affectingthe urban environmentespecially whenthese high-rise buildings are located onsmall sites next to old residential quarters,thus without any possibility of recoveringthe claimed everyday life that characterisesmost historic neighbourhoods.

Therefore, a crucial final point is thatgentrification in Latin America needs rec-ognition as an official issue. The inclusionof both theoretical debate and the empiricalcase study of the Bellavista neighbourhood,are the main contributions of this paper.Authors such as Jones and Varley (1999),Arriagada et al. (2007) and de Mattos andHidalgo (2007) have already argued aboutthe lack of empirical evidence to supportan analysis of gentrification in the develop-ing countries of Latin America. Instead ofgentrification, terms such as regeneracionurbana (urban regeneration), renovacionurbana (urban renewal) or mejoramientode barrio (neighbourhood improvement)are used by national and local governmentsin official urban policies, masterplans andurban briefs to improve semi-derelict his-toric areas and neighbourhoods in general(Redfern, 1997).

Thus, it is urgent and necessary torequire new regulatory frameworks from

policy-makers and urban managers, whichallow the development of housing marketrenewal but, at the same time, protect the localculture and reinvigorate the cultural heritageof inner areas (Hardoy and Gutman, 1992;Ward, 2001; Arizaga, 2003). Nevertheless,from the Bellavista case, it is possible to arguethat gentrification does not mean only apolicy concern. An analysis of gentrificationincluding both physical and socioeconomicindicators is fundamental as a way to under-stand the qualitative and quantitativeapproaches of this process, especially in theinner cities, where historic neighbourhoodsare being transformed into trendy areas forglobal consumption. The value that historicneighbourhoods represent for the pre-existingcommunity is priceless. The local identity andcollective memory that residents have throughmemories and images is an effective toolfor recovering the main sense of an historicneighbourhood (Boyer, 1994; Hayden 1995;Hebbert, 2005). Resisting the process ofdisplacement that affects previous residents,as observed repeatedly in many casesaround the world, is one of the most traumaticeffects of gentrification. In this sense, protec-tive legislation and effective actions toimprove historic neighbourhoods withoutlosing their essential spirit, while preservingthe inhabitants lifestyle, seem to be a main,and enduring, challenge in urban renewal asapplied in Latin America (Jones and Ward,2004).

Notes

1. Gran Santiago territory (or also Santiagocity) is defined as the main urban territoryof the Santiago Metropolitan Region with 36districts. Most of them (32 districts) belongto Santiago province and 4 districts aredistributed in three provinces: Cordillera (2),Maipo (1) and Talagante (1).

2. Examples from the other category arefamilies where the main householder belongsto the public-service sectorfor example,


state school, army or city council. However,this housing category is scarcer incomparison with the owner-occupier orrented categories.

3. Unidad de Fomento or UF is a nationaleconomic indicator; UF = Chilean $20 978.45 and approximately 23.21 (June 2009).

4. See: www.pabellon.cl. A great of number offlats are designed without balconies orterraces. Compact structures like verticalboxes are raised from the basement, tryingto maximise the available space that the localmaster plan allows for this area. In thissense, a deeper analysis of the local masterplan conditions is suggested forunderstanding the different city conceptsthat these urban instruments propose foreach district of Gran Santiago. Moreover,more mixture of residents in Santiagohistoric centre than other districts must beconsidered.

5. A close relationship amongst neighbours wasobserved by the author through the friendlyenvironment experienced in his almost twomonths as a temporary resident. To gain theco-operation of this number of participants,the author made an initial contact with keysocial activist in Bellavista; this was crucial towinning the confidence of the participantsand thus to obtain their co-operation in theinterviews. The starting point for theapplication of the interviews was during alunch meeting on Sunday 3 November 2006,to which the president of the Ciudad Vivaorganisation invited the author. In thismeeting, the author gave a brief presentationof his research to people mainly belonging toProvidencia local community; the firstparticipants were five people who werecontacted from this meeting. Thus, the maintechniques used here were mainly thesnow-ball method of finding participantsaccording to the selection criteria ofresidents. It was necessary to interview anaverage of three people per day in order toachieve a total of 60 participants inapproximately seven weeks (plus one weekfor the pilot interviews). Clearly, the contactmade at the beginning with community

leaders and the enthusiastic participation ofthe residents, especially from easternBellavista (Providencia), was decisive inachieving that average.

6. To calculate the estimated number of 1620new residents, 716 residents were given bymultiplying 2 people x the 358 new flats(data registered by Recoleta City Council in2004) as a part of new housing projects inwestern Bellavista.

Funding Statement

The author would like to thank the NationalCommission for Scientific and TechnologicalResearch of Chile (CONICYT) for funding tocarry out the research and conduct the field-work in Santiago.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express special grati-tude to the residents of the Bellavista neigh-bourhood for opening their doors and also theirhearts in the semi-structured interviews con-ducted with them from December 2006 toJanuary 2007. They shared with the author theirprecious memories and perceptions of Bellavistain the one-hour interviews. Likewise, the authorwishes to thank Ciudad Viva organisation andthe Providencia and Recoleta local communitiesfor helping to organise the official meeting car-ried out with residents on 7 July 2007. Finally,thanks are due to the referees for the commentswhich were very useful in helping to improvethe article.

References

Almandoz, A. (2006) Urban planning and histor-iography in Latin America, Progress in Plan-ning, 65(2), pp. 81123.

Arenas, F. (2006) La planificacion urbana en Chile.Siete Claves para Discutir Acerca de la Planifica-cion Urbana en Chile, Cooperativa de Ense-nanza y Aprendizaje Geografico Integral (http://www.ceagi.org/portal/?q=node/204).

Arizaga, G. D. (2003) Recuperacion de las areascentrales, in: R. Jordan and D. Simioni (Eds)Gestion Urbana para el Desarrollo Sostenible


en America Latina y el Caribe pp. 203242.Comision Economica para America Latina yel Caribe (CEPAL).

Arriagada, C. and Simioni, D. (2001) Dinamicade valorizacion del suelo en el area metropoli-tana del Gran Santiago y desafos del financia-miento urbano. Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo,CEPAL, Santiago, Chile.

Arriagada, C., Moreno, J. and Cartier, E. (2007)Evaluacion de impacto del subsidio de renova-cion urbana en el area metropolitana del GranSantiago 19912006. Monograph No. VII:327, Poltica Habitacional y Planificacion,DITEC, MINVU, Santiago, Chile.

Borsdorf, A., Hidalgo, R. and Sanchez, R. (2007)A new model of urban development in LatinAmerica: the gated communities and fencedcities in the metropolitan areas of Santiago deChile and Valparaso, Cities, 24(5), pp. 335398.

Boyer, M. C. (1994) The City of CollectiveMemory: Its Historical Imagery and Architec-tural Entertainments. Cambridge, MA: MITPress.

Butler, T. (1997) Gentrification and the MiddleClasses. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Caldeira, T. (2000) City of Walls: Crime, Segre-gation, and Citizenship in Sao Paulo. Berke-ley, CA: University of California Press.

Carrion, F. (2005) El centro historico comoproyecto y objeto de deseo, Eure, 31(93), pp.89100 (http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/eure/v31n93/art06.pdf).

CCHC (Camara Chilena de la Construccion)(2003) Promoviendo la renovacion urbana nohabitacional a traves de un mecanismo deincentivo tributario. Revista Fundamenta, 13December (http://www.camaraconstruccion.cl).

Coy, M. and Pohler, M. (2002) Gated commu-nities in Latin American megacities: case stud-ies in Brazil and Argentina, Environment andPlanning B, 29(3), pp. 355370.

Dutton, P. (2003) Leeds calling: the influence ofLondon on the gentrification of regionalcities, Urban Studies, 40(12), pp. 25572572.

Fajnzylber, F. (1990) Unavoidable IndustrialStructuring in Latin America. Durham, NC:Duke University Press.

Ford, L. (1996) A new and improved model ofthe Latin American city structure, Geographi-cal Review, 86(3), pp. 437440.

Gans, H. (1982) Urban Villagers: Group and Classin the Life of Italian Americans. New York: TheFree Press.

Garca, L. (2001) Elitizacion: propuesta en Espa-nol para el termino gentrificacion, RevistaBibliografica de Geografa y Ciencias Sociales,332 (http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/b3w-332.htm).

Garca, N. (2000) Industrias culturales y globali-zacion: procesos de desarrollo e integracionen America Latina, in: B. Kliksberg and L.Tomassini (Eds) Capital Social y Cultura:Claves Estrategicas para el Desarrollo. BuenosAires: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo/Fondo de Cultura Economica de Argentina.

Gilbert, A. (1992) Cities, Poverty, and Develop-ment: Urbanization in the Third World, 2ndedn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gilbert, A. and Ward, P. (1985) Housing, theState and the Poor: Policy and Practice in ThreeLatin American Cities. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Gilbert, A., Hardoy, J. and Ramirez, R. (1982)Urbanization in Contemporary Latin America:Critical Approaches to the Analysis of UrbanIssues. Chichester: Wiley.

Glass, R. (1964) London: Aspects of Change.London: MacGillion & Kee.

Hannigan, J. (1995) The postmodern city: a newurbanization?, Current Sociology, 43(1), pp.151217.

Hardoy, J. (1992a) Rethinking the Latin Ameri-can City. Washington, DC: Woodrow WilsonCenter Press.

Hardoy, J. (1992b) Environmental Problems inThird World Cities. London: Earthscan.

Hardoy, J. and Gutman, M. (1992) Impacto de laUrbanizacion en los Centros Historicos de Iber-oamerica: Tendencias y Perspectivas. Madrid:MAPFRE.

Hayden, D. (1995) The Power of Place: UrbanLandscapes as Public History. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Hebbert, M. (2005) The street as locus of collec-tive memory, Environment and Planning D,23, pp. 581596.

Herzer, H. and Passalacqua, E. (2003) Gestionde servicios publicos en America Latina:Comision Economica para America Latinay El Caribe, in: R. Jordan Daniela andS. Gestion (Eds) Urbana para el DesarrolloSostenible en America Latina y El Caribe, pp.


147201. Comision Economica para AmericaLatina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

Herzer, H., Virgilio, M. and di Lanzetta, M. et al.(2008) El proceso de renovacion urbana en LaBoca: organizaciones barriales entre nuevosusos y viejos lugares, Historia Actual Online,16, pp. 4162.

Hidalgo, R. and Caceres, G. (2003) BeneficenciaCatolica y barrios obreros en Santiago deChile en la transicion del siglo xix y xx: con-juntos habitacionales y actores involucrados,Scripta Nova, VII(146), No. 100.

INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadsticas) (1999)Encuesta de presupuestos familiares 19961997.Serie Estadsticas Sociales, June.

Inzulza, J. (2011) Changes to contemporaryurban culture in Latin America: experiencesof everyday life from the core of Santiago,Chile, in: T. Edensor and M. Jayne (Eds)Urban Theory Beyond the West. A World ofCities. London and New York: Routledge.

Janoschka, M. (2002) The new model of theLatin American city: fragmentation and pri-vatization, Eure, 27(85), pp. 1129.

Jones, G. and Varley, A. (1999) The reconquestof the historic centre: urban conservation andgentrification in Puebla, Mexico, Environmentand Planning, 31, pp. 15471566.

Jones, G. and Ward, P. (2004) The end of publicspace in the Latin American city? Memoria ofthe Bi-national Conference, The MexicanCenter of LILAS, University of Texas atAustin, March.

Lees, L. (2003) Super-gentrification: the case ofBrooklyn Heights, New York City, UrbanStudies, 40(12), pp. 24872509.

Lees, L., Slater, T. and Wyly, E. (2008) Gentrifica-tion. New York: Routledge.

Lindon, A. (2005) El mito de la casa propia ylas formas de habitar, Scripta Nova, IX(194),No. 20.

Lungo, M. and Baires, S. (2001) Socio-spatialsegregation and urban land regulation inLatin American cities. Paper presented atthe International Seminar on Segregation inthe City, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy,July.

MacDonald, J. (2003) Pobreza y ciudad en Amer-ica Latina y el Carib, in: R. Jordan and D.Simioni (Eds) Gestion Urbana para el Desar-rollo Sostenible en America Latina y el Caribe

pp. 93144. Comision Economica para Amer-ica Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

Mattos, C. de and Hidalgo, R. (Eds) (2007) San-tiago de Chile: Movilidad Espacial y Reconfi-guracion Metropolitana. Chile: ColeccionEURE Libros.

Mattos, C., de Riffo, C., Yanez, G. and Salas, X.(2005) Reestructuracion del mercado metropo-litano de trabajo y cambios socio territoriales enel Gran Santiago. Final Report Fondecyt Proj-ect No. 1040838, IEU, PUC, INE, Santiago.

MIDEPLAN (Ministerio de Planificacion)(2000) Encuesta de caracterizacion socioecono-mica nacional CASEN 2000 (http://www.mideplan.cl).

Municipalidad de Recoleta (2005a) Plan regula-dor comuinal de Recoleta (http://www.recoleta.cl).

Municipalidad de Recoleta (2005b) Proyectos rele-vantes proyectados in Bellavista-Recoleta peri-odo 20012005. Reporte Arquitecto RodrigoBarros, Departamento de Edificacion.

Ortiz, J. and Morales, S. (2002) Impacto socioespacial de las migraciones intraurbanas enentidades de centro y de nuevas periferias delGran Santiago, Eure, 28(85), pp. 171185.

Pacione, M. (1990) Urban Problems: An AppliedUrban Analysis. London: Routledge.

Panadero, M. (2001) El proceso de urbanizacionde America Latina durante el periodo cient-fico-tecnico, Revista Bibliografica de Geografay Ciencias Sociales, 298, pp. 742798.

Portes, A. (1989) Latin American urbanization inthe years of the crisis, Latin American ResearchReview, 24(2), pp. 744.

Ramon de, A. (2001) Santiago has always livedafraid of the plebe. Chilean Cultural HeritageCorporation (http://www.nuestro.cl/eng/stories/recovery/deramon.thm).

Redfern, P. (1997) A new look at gentrification:1. gentrification and domestic technologies,Environment & Planning A, 29(7), pp. 12751296.

Rodrguez, A. and Winchester, L. (2001) Santiagoreport: governance and urban poverty. Univer-sity of Birmingham.

Rodrguez, A. and Winchester, L. (2004) San-tiago de Chile: una ciudad fragmentada, in:C. de Mattos, M. E. Ducci, A. Rodrguez andG. Yanez (Eds) Santiago en la Globalizacion:Una Nueva Ciudad? Santiago: Ediciones SUR.


Rojas, E., Rodriguez, E. and Wegelin, E. (2004)Volver al centro: la recuperacion de las urba-nas centrales. Banco Interamericano deDesarrollo, Washington, DC (http://www.revistacentro-h.org/pdf/11.pdf).

Rubino, S. (2005) A curious blend? City revitali-sation, gentrification and commodificationin Brazil, in: R. Atkinson and G. Bridge (Eds)Gentrification in a Global Context: The NewUrban Colonialism, pp. 225239. London:Routledge.

Sabatini, F. (1997) Liberalizacion de los mercadosde suelo y segregacion social en las ciudadesLatinoamericanas: el caso de Santiago. Draft,Urban Land Markets in Latin America Proj-ect, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cam-bridge, MA.

Sargatal, M. (2000) El estudio de la gentrifica-cion, Revista Bibliografica de Geografia y Cien-cias Sociales, 228 (http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/b3w-228.htm).

SEREX (2002) Evaluacion del potencial inmo-biliario de terrenos EFE/INVIA en el anillocentral metropolitano. Estudios Territor-iales, Pontificia Universidad Catolica deChile.

Smith, N. (1996) The New Urban Frontier: Gen-trification and the Revanchist City. New York:Routledge.

Smith, N. and Williams, P. (Eds) (1986) Gentri-fication of the City. Boston, MA: Allen &Unwin.

Valenzuela, M (2003) Programa de repobla-miento de Santiago: un programa de gestionurbana, Urbano, 6(8), pp. 5361.

Ward, P. (1993) The Latin American inner city:differences of degree or of kind?, Environment& Planning A, 25(8), pp. 11311160.

Ward, P. (2001) The rehabilitation of consolidatedirregular settlements in Latin American cities:towards a third generation of public policyhousing analysis and development. Paper pre-sented at the ESF Workshop Coping withInformality and Illegality in Human Settle-ments in Developing Countries, Leuven andBrussels, May.

Weesep, J. van (1994) Gentrification as a researchfrontier, Progress in Human Geography, 18(1),pp. 7483.

White, P. (1984) The West European City: ASocial Geography. London: Longman.

Winchester, L., Caceres, T. and Rodrguez, A.(2001) Bellavista: la defensa de un barrio, acti-vismo poltico local, Proposiciones, 28 (http://www.sitiosur.cl/r.php?id=423).

Yarwood, D. (1974) The Architecture of Europe.London: Chancellor Press.

Zukin, S. (1988) Loft Living: Culture and Capitalin Urban Change. London: Radius.


/ColorImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict > /JPEG2000ColorImageDict > /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 266 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /Warning /DownsampleGrayImages false /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 266 /GrayImageDepth 8 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /FlateEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages false /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict > /GrayImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict > /JPEG2000GrayImageDict > /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 900 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /Warning /DownsampleMonoImages false /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 900 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.33333 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict > /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /PDFX1a:2001 ] /PDFX1aCheck true /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly true /PDFXNoTrimBoxError false /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (ISO Coated v2 300% \050ECI\051) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False

/CreateJDFFile false /Description

impinzulza 2012 (us)

Documents

thesechanges of gentrification

historical neighbourhoods

term gentrification

tooccupy inner neighbourhoods

urban morphologyand

latin americaas

thesocial change

change of tenure