Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

This paper aims to clarify three points by examining the contents of three high-school Geography-B textbooks on gentrification in New York City.
The first point is that the textbooks do not delineate recent gentrified areas in New York City. During the 2000s, white population increased in northern Brooklyn. However, the textbooks mention gentrification in South Manhattan.
Second, there is no explanation of the causes of gentrification. Textbooks should explain the rent gap in inner city areas as a gentrification factor in North Brooklyn. Textbooks present commercial gentrification in southern Manhattan where the rent gap has been closed.
Third, textbooks should show the consequences of gentrification based on cases in New York City. Although the textbooks introduce immigrants’ communities in New York City, there is no mention of the displacement of Puerto Ricans in South-side, Brooklyn. As rents have increased in North Brooklyn, textbooks should include the causes and effects of gentrification, and stimulate thinking regarding the next gentrified areas.

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Joint Work  

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

This paper aims to analyze the consequences of tourism gentrification in post-socialist Budapest. Previously, under the socialist government, houses were requisitioned and redistributed among the working class. Due to lack of maintenance, inner-city housing declined substantially.
Since the abolishment of the socialist regime, state-owned housing was sold to occupants for about 9% of the estimated market price. In the 2000s, many state-owned properties in District VII were rendered unsalable due to their delapidated conditions. Ruin bars that house dilapidated residential buildings have seen widespread popularity since 2004. Most residents weary of the nightlife sounds tend to leave; leading to night-time tourism-induced displacement.

DOI： 10.32245/urbangeography.15.0_91

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/urbangeography/15/0/15_91/_article/-char/ja/

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Gentrification has emerged in post-socialist cities since the 1990s. This paper aims to clarify three factors of gentrification: the changing inner urban structure, change in landscape, and consequences of river side development in Prague.
Under a socialist government earlier, the central city area did not boast of great commercial and service activities. However, with the introduction of a market economy, commercialization began to happen. In the 1990s, the Czech government undertook restitution of properties to its owners, or their heirs. Thereafter, gentrification occurred in Vinohrady, an old well-planned suburb.
Historic landscapes were preserved as world cultural heritage in central Prague. Historical buildings in the city center were used as cafes, restaurants, or souvenir shops for tourists, with a few even refurbished as tourist accommodation. However, a new development was that of office buildings that came up around the historic city center, largely because of demand from foreign establishments.
The working classes lived in Karlín. On vacant brown fields between existing communities and the Vltava river, office buildings and condominiums were constructed. Prices are higher in housing units with Loggia than normal housing units. In general, rising housing prices affected the formerly affordable housing markets in Prague, where multinational occupants, especially affluent Russians came to reside. However, these buildings faced risk of floods because of their proximity to the river.

DOI： 10.32245/urbangeography.14.0_28

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/urbangeography/14/0/14_28/_article/-char/ja/

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

The paper aims to clarify three points. The first is a comparison of industrial restructuring among three world cities: London, New York City and Tokyo. The share of finance and insurance and real estates is 9% in London, 12% in New York City, and 8% in Tokyo. The share of professional and technical services is 13% in London and New York City, but only 5% in Tokyo.
The second is an examination of social polarization among white-collar workers, service workers and factory workers. White-collar workers live in central and west Tokyo. Service workers live in northeast and south Tokyo. Factory workers live in the peripheral wards of Adachi, Ota, and Edogawa. Social polarization among foreign workers is revealed.
The third is a study of the relation between globalization and gentrification, using an index of a change in foreign inhabitants, professional and technical workers. The study districts are Minato 3 in Chuo ward and Shirokane 1 and 3 in Minato ward.
In Minato 3, high-rise condominium constructions have resulted in gentrification. Super high-rise condominiums could be constructed because the developers bought all sites. The rents in some housing units are very high and mostly foreign workers live in these condominiums with their families.
In Shirokane 1 and 3, many small and medium-sized factories had been in operation until the early 1990s. However, most factories and factory workers were displaced, and private condominiums were constructed in these areas. Large-scale redevelopment happened in Shirokane 1, which resulted in the construction of high-rise office buildings and condominiums. Mostly foreign companies occupy in the office buildings; the number of and foreigners’ inhabitants has increased in this area.

DOI： 10.20592/jaeg.63.4_320

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jaeg/63/4/63_320/_article/-char/ja

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

This paper aims to review gentrification studies from the 2000s. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the number of articles on gentrification has rapidly increased, rising in tandem with the increase in urbanology studies. The governments of advanced capitalist countries generally aim to revitalize deteriorated inner city areas. These policies caused gentrification, a fact studied in many scholarly articles examining the relationship between urban policy and gentrification. Such studies on gentrification focus not only on Western cities, but also post-socialist cities in Eastern Europe and cities in East Asia and South America.
This paper also clarifies three points regarding the case of inner London in the 2000s. First, London demonstrates the phenomenon of shifting gentrification frontiers. In 1964, Grass mentioned that the East End had so far been exempted from the condition, but gentrification nonetheless occurred in East London in the 2000s. Second, London demonstrates the changing state of gentrification. In Burnsbury, Islington, where gentrification occurred in the 1960s, newcomers to the area engaged in so-called super-gentrification. On the other hand, new-build gentrification altered under-utilized lands along the River Thames. The third point involves the effects of urban policy on gentrification. The London Plan’s “Blue Ribbon Network” affected gentrification in the under-utilized land along the old canals in Tower Hamlets and Hackney.

DOI： 10.5637/jpasurban.2016.44

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jpasurban/2016/34/2016_44/_article/-char/ja

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

<p>Gentrification has emerged in post-socialist cities since the 1990s. This paper aims to clarify three factors: the changing geographical locations, causes, and consequences of contemporary gentrification in East Berlin. In the 1990s, the German government undertook the restitution of properties to owners or their descendants. In the mid-1990s, the number of subsidized refurbishments of historical houses had increased in Prenzlauer Berg. By the late 1990s, the number of privately financed refurbishments had increased and, in the late 2000s, the numbers of affluent people had risen in the Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg ward. In Friedrichshain, the population had multiplied in the districts not far from the city center. The working classes lived in Friedrichshain, and there were many dilapidated historical apartments. Creative industries and multinational companies have accumulated along the Spree river since the mid-2000s. The increase of multinational occupants has been caused by them in Friedrichshain. The atmosphere in the neighborhood has been created by programs of renovation that have facilitated gentrification in Friedrichshain. In the 2000s, gated communities of luxury housing were also developed. Historical buildings in the Gründerzeit period were targeted for renovation by developers. There is also a new development of condominiums which imitates the contemporaneous architectural style of Gründerzeit and historical landscapes since Gründerziet have been destroyed by the new construction of condominiums. Prices are higher in new-build housing units than in renovated housing units and rising housing prices have affected the formerly affordable housing markets in Berlin.</p>

DOI： 10.32245/urbangeography.11.0_1

CiNii Article

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

<p>In the 2000s, gentrification spread to North Brooklyn in New York City. Loft architecture was used for studios and factories, and warehouses were converted for creative activities in Williamsburg. Additionally, industrial landscape was used as a motif for creative apparel brands. Then, in 2005, industrial zones were changed to residential and commercial zones in Williamsburg and Greenpoint. A floor area bonus for construction of new condominiums was given in order to create affordable housing units. However, residents recognized a usage gap between ownership housing units and renting housing units. Large-scale new-build gentrification led to displacement of minorities.</p>

DOI： 10.32245/urbangeography.10.0_34

CiNii Article

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/urbangeography/10/0/10_34/_article/-char/ja/

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work   International / domestic magazine：Domestic journal  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

Sydney

Publishing type：Research paper (bulletin of university, research institution)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (bulletin of university, research institution)  

Publishing type：Research paper (bulletin of university, research institution)  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (bulletin of university, research institution)  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (bulletin of university, research institution)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

Authorship：Lead author   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Kind of work：Single Work  

DOI： 10.4200/jjhg1948.42.466

Other URL： https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjhg1948/42/5/42_5_466/_article/-char/ja/

Total pages：191   Book type：Scholarly book Participation form：First Author

Total pages：144   Book type：Scholarly book

Total pages：185   Book type：Scholarly book

CiNii Books

Total pages：258   Responsible for pages：147-158   Book type：Scholarly book Participation form：First Author

Book type：Scholarly book

Book type：Scholarly book

Book type：Scholarly book

Total pages：113   Responsible for pages：80-88   Book type：Scholarly book Participation form：First Author

Total pages：130   Book type：Scholarly book

Total pages：174   Book type：Scholarly book

Book type：Scholarly book

Book type：Scholarly book Participation form：First Author

Book type：Scholarly book