economy first draft

Joy Marie Prior, February 4, 2009, Sociology 112, Section 4, Article Essay
Adam Millard-Ball’s thesis is that rent gap and value gap theories do not sufficiently illustrate how gentrification occurs in Stockholm, Sweden. Some key terms that he uses are ‘Gentrification’, which he defined as the social and physical upgrade of a residential neighborhood; ‘rent gap,’ the property-specific prediction that rent prices increase as housing prices increase in a specific neighborhood, typically resulting with the displacement of the poorer class who once rented there; ‘value gap,’ a less place-dependent and more time-specific idea that individual property value can increase as the value of adjacent properties increases; ‘Post-industrial economy’ the economy that enabled many to improve their social status resulting in the gentrification of the inner city; ‘utility value system’ or ‘rent control,’ is laws that prohibit private landlords to charge more rent than a set price negotiated between municipal housing companies and tenants’ association typically resulting in little variation between rent prices across a given area (such as in the case of Stockholm, Sweden); and ‘co-operatives’ when residents own property collectively (typically one or two tenement buildings) and occupy a certain flat which can be traded at market price. Adam’s empirical research is a quantitative outline of the tenure change in inner-city Stockholm, and an examination of the social changes resulting from that tenure conversation from private rent to co-operative ownership. Adam’s line of argument is that rent and value gaps theories which traditionally are credited for gentrification does not apply to Stockholm, Sweden. There is not a free housing market in Stockholm, Sweden but a utility value system. Adam suggests that because of it’s mixed-market economy gentrification in Stockholm can not be explained resulting from rent and value gaps theories based on free housing market economies. Although gap theories apply to free market systems, they do not describe gentrification in mixed-market countries. The conclusion is that researchers should expand their theoretical framework for gentrification to something more universally than simply rent gap and value gap theories.
I agree with Adam Millard-Ball’s opinion that a variety of cities and their economies should be considered before concluding that the rent and value gaps are the only possible explanations of gentrification. Adam explains how Stockholm, Sweden’s economy differs from London, England’s. The brief overview of both the cities helped me understand how many economical variables there are from city to city. In a free housing market (which is the economical system of cities that the rent gap and value gap theories evolved from) such factors as co-operatives, luxury renovations, or tenure would never be considered components of gentrification simply because they are not apart of free market economy. These elements are apart of Stockholm’s economy, because it has a rent limit and different regulations. Just as the authors of the rent and value gap theories based their explanations of gentrification on factors specific to London’s economy Adam based his assumptions of gentrification in Stockholm on factors specific to Stockholm. To me it is logical that a city’s unique economical factors will be the components of gentrification for that city, and not a cookie cutter theory. I believe there are many points (specifically in Stockholm) not considered in the rent and value gaps theories that can contribute to gentrification, and I agree that a variety of areas should be studied to determine what those specific point could be.